The Masters were not listed by their patients as primary caregivers on their patient registry cards, but the Masters themselves are patients and had been registered as such through the state. The biggest problem here is that patients are not required to list a primary caregiver at any time, and the state does not note the dates that a primary caregiver is added or omitted from those patient cards. Most of the patients who testified at the hearing are their own primary caregivers (meaning they supply themselves), but they all acknowledged that the Masters' had played a "significant" role as caregivers, which was the primary argument of the defense. The district attorney's case rested almost entirely on trying to prove that the Masters were not "primary" caregivers to any of the witnesses because they didn't provide housing, childcare, money or at least one week's worth of food to any of the patients. Back here in reality, the challenge would be to find any careproviders, save family members, who provide any of those necessities without the assistance of Medicaid and/or Medicare, and such cases are generally extreme and immediately life-threatening. As I listened to the witness testimony, two things became clear: for many patients with painfully and emotionally debilitating illnesses (most of them chronic), cannabis is a smarter, likely healthier choice than highly addictive narcotics (which, by the way, are the most abused drugs among today's youth); and the state's medical marijuana registry, which is administered via the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, needs some streamlining and clarification. The Rocky Mountain Chronicle has covered the Masters' trials (criminal case too) since January, and I have posted links to our series on the homepage of our blog, rmholla.blogspot.com.