Heidi Fleiss found with almost 400 pot plants


Heidi Fleiss is a MARIJUANA BARON ... so say authorities in Nevada who charged the former Hollywood madam with pot possession after finding nearly 400 plants on her property, TMZ has learned.

According to law enforcement, officials pulled up to Heidi's home in Pahrump on August 7 looking for another woman ... when they stumbled upon a gigantic weed farm.

Eventually, officers made contact with Heidi ... who admitted to owning the plants and said she was growing the weed for a "cooperative in Las Vegas."

Problem is ... Heidi doesn't have a license to grow.

Cops say ... in total, they found 392 suspected marijuana plants -- which were all collected as evidence.

Fleiss was charged with several crimes -- including possession of marijuana with intent to sell, possession of drug paraphernalia and maintaining a home where drugs are sold/used. 

However, cops say Fleiss was NOT arrested ... "due to the fact that she has approximately $200,000 worth of exotic birds in the residence plus she gave us consent to search without a warrant and was very cooperative throughout the investigation."

Get the MMA Underground app. for iPhone and Andriod devices.
iPhone Application Andriod MMA Underground Application

Recent Comments »

jasonhightower site profile image  

8/15/13 12:54 PM by jasonhightower

Very good points Dirk.  VTFU I do still think the general negative feeling toward the law enforcement officer is unfortunate.  There are times where I think they should choose not to prosecute/arrest folks guilty of minor offenses. Unfortunately we still have ridiculous laws that exist around weed and I can't blame many of them for enforcing. We can talk about the Nuremberg trials or Hitler or whatever, but those are much more complex issues.  I can't honestly believe that every single DEA agent or every single police officer who has enforced the laws, they have committed to enforcing, is equivalent to a Muslim cop beating a woman driving a car.

DirkH site profile image  

8/15/13 10:53 AM by DirkH

To some extent, yes. I must. Hitler and his government were evil, but how many people could they have actually killed without the support of the people who actually pulled the trigger for them.In my opinion, it's immoral to enforce an immoral law. St Augustine said that if judge is forced to support an immoral law his only moral recourse was to QUIT. Police can simply "go limp" and refuse to arrest people for B.S. infractions. Yes, they might bet fired, so what. So much is illegal in the US that police use their discression NOT to prosecute 100 times a day. If they didn't, everyone would would in jail. Ever done 60mph in a 55mph zone and had a cop NOT pull you over? Or pull you over and simply give you a warning? Discression. You were breaking the law. You both know it, and in the case of speeding you were probably endagering others (though even the cop knows it' was only slightly so he gives you a pass).As to whether anything makes is into the hands of a 12 year old; that's a non argument. Should 12 year olds have alcohol? No, so do we ban alcohol. Should they have guns? Drive cars? Do we then ban cars and guns for everyone? Should 12 year old girls have sex? Of course not. Do we then ban the possession of dicks because one might find it's way to a 12 year old. Boy that day will suck.Saying drugs should be legal for adults is not the same as saying "lets sell drugs to 6th graders", and you know it.Why is pot judged by a completely different standard that any other dangerous thing that we wouldn't want a 12 year old to come across? How may kids die of liver failure due to acetaminophen poisoning every year. How may die of pot OD? Smoking pot a lot, long term, probably is bad for you, but there's never ever been a single case of death due to acute overdose. Very few drugs can make that same argument.But back to my main point. Individuals are responsible for their actions. You can't blame the "system". IF you carry out the action, you are part of the system.I extend these same arguments to jurors on trials. If I was ever on a jury (I won't be, I'm an engineer, I know several engineers who were called for jury duty. If you can think logically, either the prosecution or defense will reject you. They want idiots. My lawyer friends have confirmed this, repeatedly), anyway, were I on a jury I simply could not convict a person for such a "non crime", period. Oh, you caught him growing pot? Not guilty. Oh, she took $100 in exchange for sex? Not guilty.He played his radio to loud at night and annoyed his neighbors? Guilty. She could afford weed but is on food stamps? Guilty of wellfare fraud, not drug possession, per se.

BigEyedFish site profile image  

8/15/13 10:21 AM by BigEyedFish

correct but they dont tell companies what to add per se. They approve what companies want to add and there is nothing that suggests MJ companies would want to load up their product like tobacco companies did.

angryinch site profile image  

8/15/13 9:46 AM by angryinch

"So you all are blaming the cops who arguably are doing their job instead of the system which creates the laws?"   lol @ the "just following orders" defense.  Didn't we do away with that in the Nuremberg trials?      

jasonhightower site profile image  

8/15/13 9:35 AM by jasonhightower

So you all are blaming the cops who arguably are doing their job instead of the system which creates the laws?How do you know if none of that pot makes it into the hands of a 12 year old who isn't prepared to use it responsibly? Not so victimless in most scenarios like this I bet.For the record, I'm for marijuana legalization with basic controls in place to help keep it unavailable to minors or irresponsible users.

othree site profile image  

8/14/13 5:54 PM by othree

With the labor laws being as strict as they are, corporations have to find cheap domestic labor somewhere.

TheHawker site profile image  

8/14/13 5:32 PM by TheHawker

Marijuana was completely legal for the first 150 years of our history. Remember how society fell apart and our economy ground to a halt because everyone was stoned during that time? Me neither.Has the war on drugs stopped people from smoking pot? No. It's ridiculously easy to get and anyone who wants to smoke can.The only difference between now and when it was legal is that our prison population has increased exponentially.

othree site profile image  

8/14/13 5:22 PM by othree

Also, gave ya a big ol' VTFU for coming in here and giving me your perspective, BEF.

othree site profile image  

8/14/13 5:15 PM by othree

The FDA approves what can/can't be added.