Talk:Smoking (rolling paper)

Untitled

The charges are completely BOGUS. We've been selling Smoking brand in the USA for many years and are the USA Importer of such. How can MCM be charged with a criminal offense when basically every other company is also making papers with wood in them? It's ridiculous and we stand by MCM in this! --Joshmann 21:29, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

REPLY: Wiki is NOT a place for advertising. Since 'Joshmann' is related to the product in question he should NOT post here nor put up his protectionary comments. You are certainly BIASED and thus should not post on this topic! --Mrtobacco 15:26, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

My Reply: I am not posting advertising, I am just trying to post some correct information. The stuff you guys are writing is totally biased against Smoking papers. I am just trying to put up fair info so that people can see both sides of the story - or in this case they can see the TRUTH from me! C'mon - most papers have wood in them and it's not fair to single out one company when most others are doing it as well! --Joshmann 20:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Josh quit sucking up dude. You're a nice guy but don't bend over for anyone OK? --Mrtobacco 00:54, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

I thought Wikipedia was about neutrality?

I am new to this, but what I've seen as a general rule in Wikipedia is a generally fair and unbiased treatment of subjects. Saying that Smoking Master are too hard to roll without ripping is no kind of concensus that I've been exposed to. As a regular roller, though I don't generally roll with Smoking Master, quite a number of my friends do and I've never once been witness to or have heard of this problem. Also, for all that I read in the Wikipedia introduction that no personal attacks will be tolerated, what's this "don't bend over" slag about? Mr Tobacco, I don't know what you've got against Smoking, but you certainly seem to be showing your own BIAS. Funk'd 02:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

WAIT - I am not the person who wrote that. I have been rolling my own for over 20 years - it's no problem for me to roll in a Smoking Master! Don't blame me for it. Go in there and take it down or I will. Geez, dude I have nothing against them except that company shouldn't have done that hidden carcinogen thing, that really is unfair to consumers especially people with HIV or Cancer who smoke to alleviate pain. It's unfair that they think Smoking papers are 'better' for them then Zig Zags when perhaps the opposite is true right? --Mrtobacco 16:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Translation

I am cutting this out of the article. Not sure what do with it, but if it is just a translation, then it may still violate WP:COPYVIO. -- ǝʌlǝʍʇ ǝuo-ʎʇuǝʍʇ ^ssnɔsıp 19:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

To clarify the information in the last paragraph, and on behalf of Miquel y Costas, I upload the official English translation of an audit that confirms Miquel y Costas and his company are not using carcinogenic raw materials in their manufacturing process:

OPPONENT: VIÑAS LÓPEZ, JUAN

DETAILS: CONSUMER APPEAL

COURT: SECTION 07 OF PROVINCIAL COURT

ORDER: 451/06 E AB&L 19232B

PROVINCIAL COURT

OF BARCELONA

SECTION SEVEN

ROLL NO. 451/06 – E

PRIOR PROCEEDINGS NO. 1916/00

INSTRUCTION COURT NO. 16 OF BARCELONA

D E C I S I O N

Honourable Sirs.

MS. ANA INGELMO FERNÁNDEZ

MR. PEDRO L. GARCÍA MUÑOZ

MS. ANA RODRÍGUEZ SANMIGUEL

In the city of Barcelona, on November 3rd, 2006.

F A C T S

FIRST.- By the Instruction Court no. 16 of Barcelona, dated May 22, 2006 an order was made with the following wording: "MR. JAIME CONEJO HEREDIA, MAGISTRATE JUDGE of the Instruction Court no. 16 of Barcelona ORDERS: Follow with the procedure set forth in Chapter IV, Title III,

(COURT REGISTER SEAL DATED DEC 4, 2006)

Book IV of the Criminal Proceedings Act in view of a possible criminal offence against public health, provided for and punished in article 363.1 of the Criminal Code, being charged with such offence JORDI MERCADER MIRO and LUIS MARIA COLLADOS ECHENIQUE with application of the provisions of Article 31 of the Criminal Court and the company MIQUEL COSTAS Y MIQUEL as civil liable, and therefore, forward this prior proceedings to the public prosecutor and all other interested parties in order for them to, within a common ten-day deadline, apply to the opening of an oral trial by submitting a writ of accusation or the dismissal of the case, or, as the case may be, request for supplementary proceedings indispensable to formulate an accusation due to the lack of material elements for the classification of facts".

SECOND.- Upon notification of the said resolution to the appearing parties, a reform appeal was submitted by the solicitor's clerk Mr. Antonio Anzizu on behalf and in representation of Jordi Mercader Miró, Luis María Collados Echenique and the company Miquel Coatas y Miquel SA; being the said appeal admitted to proceedings and given due consideration, it was resolved by an order dated May 22, 2006, in which recitals the instance judge dismissed said reform appeal. Through an order of July 10, 2006 a complaint appeal was admitted to proceedings against the said order, urging the parties to appear before the Provincial Court and being the orders forwarded.

Rapporteur Judge is Ms. ANA INGELMO FERNANDO.

LEGAL REASONING

SINGLE.- This appeal is submitted against the court order dated May 22, 2006, which agrees to start the intermediate phase of the Abbreviated Procedure.

The appealing party requests the dismissal of the case, as it deems the event that gave rise does not have the features of an offence. In the proceeding stage we are at, the beginning of the intermediate phase of the Abbreviated Procedure is not sufficient anymore to ascertain the existence of rational signs of criminality against a given person, which the imputation provided for in Art. 775 of the Criminal Proceedings Act allows for.

In the intermediate phase, the exercising of the criminal action to be carried out in the plenary is prepared. Therefore, in order to this phase to start it is necessary that in the hearing a solid objective ground be established that will enable the exercising of the criminal action with a chance to success. A probatory ground must be established in relation to the relevant event, which shall be charged as an accusation and shall be an offence, including the participation of a given person in the event. This is what Art. 779.4 of the Criminal Proceedings Act provides for, the initial decision of the intermediate phase must contain the event giving rise to an offence as well as details on the intervention of the accused party. That event, which must have been proved by signs, as evidences are to be presented in the oral hearing and are the grounds of the judgement that will be entered, which has features of an criminal offence as well as the possibility to charge it upon the relevant person, that it what justifies the proceeding with the criminal against.

In this case, by way of an appeal, the Court must review that the event was indeed established, as well as the participation of the indicted person and analyse in such an event has features of an offence.

The event that gave rise to the case has been established, the indicted persons, responsible for the entity "Miquel Costas y Miquel, S.A.", were manufacturers of smoking paper for subsequent use in two cigarette brands. This paper, according to the Food Code has to be manufactured out of fibres from plants like hemp, flax, cotton, etc. The indicted persons were using cellulose from tree species such as pine tree or eucalyptus. It is also clear the participation of the two appellants as regards of Art. 31 of the Criminal Code. Still pending analysis whether that event constitutes an offence under Art. 363.4 of the Criminal Code, which punishes the manufacturing of products which use is not authorize and is hazardous for health; in order to analyse this matter it is essential the report prepared by the Legal Medicine Professor of the University of Medicine of Barcelona, Mr. Emilio Huguet. In the said report it is established that the combustion of paper of any kind produces the so-called PAH, in the form of DIBENZOPYRE, BENZOPYRE and PYRE, these substances being hazardous for the health. It also establishes that the combustion of paper made out of cellulose paste originates a greater amount of "PAH", but in its conclusions establishes that it is not possible to reach the conclusion that the fibre type used for the manufacturing of cigarettes may substantially modify the amount of PAH in the smoke stemming from the cigarette to the extent of having an impact on the smoker's health. Indeed, based on the assumption that smoking itself entails risks for the health, regardless of the type of paper used in the manufacturing of the cigarette. From the other reports submitted in the case there is nothing that contradicts the conclusion drawn by Dr. Huguet. What causes a hazard to the health is smoking, and the use of paper made out of "cellulose" from tree species does not entail a further risk for the smoker's health. This is the conclusion reached by the expert, and from the rest of actions there is no probatory ground in which sustain that the manufacturing and marketing of paper for use in the manufacturing of cigarettes of the nature we are dealing with in this case, entails a further risk for the smoker's health.

But, as on the other hand, the expert has established that there could be a possibility to undertake a trial research that is not yet carried out for determining the difference between the combustion of cigarettes made with either types of paper, the one dealt with herein and paper made out from flax, cotton, etc...the dismissal granted herein is of a provisional nature as provided for in Art. 641.1 of the Criminal Proceedings Act.

In view of the articles mentioned above and others of general and relevant application herein.

JUDGEMENT

The Court has resolved: Admitting the appeal submitted by JORDI MERCADER MIRO, LUIS MARIA COLLADOS ECHENIQUE and the ENTITY MIQUEL Y COSTAS Y MIQUEL, S.A. we hereby revoke the Order dated May 22, 2006 that triggered the intermediate phase of the Abbreviated Procedure, and instead we resolve to the provisional dismissal of the case.

Be this order notified to the Prosecution and all other parties, be a relevant certification attached to the Court Roll and be extracted a testimony thereof to be submitted to the instructing court for its general knowledge and effects, and upon so being verified, file this roll without further proceedings, with due prior notes in the relevant Register Book.

This has been agreed and resolved by the Court, and so it is signed by their Honours; I attest.

PROCEEDING.- Therefore the agreed provision is complied with and so I certify.

That false information about the use of carcinogenic materials was published three years ago in the Cannabis Culture magazine and then his editor, Marc Emery, apologised for that misinformation publishing the following letter in issue 67 of his magazine:

Last issue we got it wrong when we said that Miquel Costas Y Miquel paper makers in Spain were convicted of using inferior materials in certain brands of rolling papers. There was in fact an investigation into an accusation but a Barcelona judge analyzed all the evidence and declared that using pine tree or eucalyptus is in no way hazardous in the paper making process and no evidence existed to show that any MCM paper product is hazardous. Numerous other Spanish and English media also reported the story incorrectly, where CC got its original information. We apologized to MCM for reporting the court decision inaccurately, which I realized when I obtained the English language transcripts supplied by the Barcelona court. I have every confidence that MCM is doing only top-notch manufacturing and encouraged them to allow us to photograph the MCM rolling paper making factory in an upcoming issue of CC. They agreed and were very gracious about getting the message out that their rolling paper making process is very safe with the highest levels of quality controls and emphasized that no court, judge or civil matter has ever established any irregularity of any kind in MCM’s rolling papers, including such brands as Bambu, Smoking, Bob Marley brand.