Five jurors and an alternate in the Ed Rosenthal marijuana trial held a press conference today. They demanded the Judge grant Ed a new trial. And as expected, they apologized to Ed -- one at a time.

The jurors said they had been unaware that the defendant, Ed Rosenthal, was growing marijuana for medicinal purposes, allowed since 1996 under California state law, when they convicted him on three federal counts of cultivation and conspiracy. He is to be sentenced in June and faces a minimum of five years in prison. "I'm sorry doesn't begin to cover it," said one of the jurors, Marney Craig, a property manager in Novato. "It's the most horrible mistake I've ever made in my entire life. And I don't think that I personally will ever recover from this."

The group said that two other juror members agreed with them. They were joined by the San Francisco district attorney and two members of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.

"In good faith, we as jury members allowed ourselves to be blindfolded to weigh the evidence before us," the statement said. "But in this trial, the prosecution was allowed to put all of the evidence and testimony on one of the scales, while the defense was not allowed to put its evidence and testimony on the other scale. Therefore we were not allowed as a jury to properly weigh the case."

In a nutshell, here was the problem:

The judge in the case, Judge Charles R. Breyer of Federal District Court, had barred Mr. Rosenthal's defense from mentioning the state law because he was indicted under federal law, which does not allow the growing of marijuana for any purpose.

When he was arrested last February, Mr. Rosenthal was cultivating starter plants in a warehouse that were to be distributed to seriously ill patients by medical marijuana clubs in the San Francisco Bay Area. Mr. Rosenthal, who lives in Oakland, was acting in his official capacity as "an officer of the city" under Oakland's medical marijuana ordinance, Oakland officials said....

"In good faith, we as jury members allowed ourselves to be blindfolded to weigh the evidence before us," the statement said. "But in this trial, the prosecution was allowed to put all of the evidence and testimony on one of the scales, while the defense was not allowed to put its evidence and testimony on the other scale. Therefore we were not allowed as a jury to properly weigh the case."

In other words, Mr. Rosenthal's actions were legal under California law but not under federal law. The Judge ruled that because the trial was in federal court, state law was inadmissible and could not be used as a defense. Thus, the jurors never heard Ed's actions were authorized by the city of Oakland.

Lots of other bloggers are talking about the case, and thankfully, the mainstream media is picking up on it. In the end, we predict it will become one more black mark against Attorney General Ashcroft, at whose insistence the prosecution was launched. We hope he is ridiculed for it as he has become a caricature for non-tolerance and interference with all of our civil liberties.

Update: GlennReynolds.com , aka Instapundit, weighs in for Rosenthal. " Meanwhile, the Ashcroft Justice Department — which I thought was supposed to be protecting federalism, and chasing terrorists — needs to explain why it’s wasting time and tax dollars chasing people who are no threat to anyone, and who are doing things that are legal under their own state’s laws. I’m waiting. . . ."

Update: The grand jury transcripts are out in the case--Don't miss Dan Forbes article , "A Peek Behind the Rosenthal Grand Jury Veil: Manipulation Rampant."