Of course they should be using the total pill's weight. And it's not anything underhanded. That's the way they wrote the law in the Controlled Substances Act. When they talk about weights as the breakpoint between different degrees of crime, they intended to include any fillers, binders, "cutting agents," etc. The intent was to include the total mass of the consumable product ... which hopefully does not include plastic bottles ...

In 1998 a guy was arrested for having about five gallons of a GHB-water mixture in one of those big water coolers they have in offices. There was probably only about a pound of GHB in there but they charged him with possession of over 30 pounds of a GHB mixture. They never try to figure out how "pure" it is and go from there. They just weigh the entire amount of the consumable product. They shouldn't be adding in the weight of the bottle, just the total mixture. See 21 CFR 1308. Through and through it refers to "mixture containing ..."

I guess if it was so dilute that it wasn't psychoactive, a lawyer could make a good argument that it wasn't a controlled substance and move for dismissal. Say it was one Norco dissolved in a swimming pool of water. Could they convict someone for possessing over 100,000 pounds (50 tons) of a hydrocodone mixture if they owned the pool and they had thrown that pill in there "knowingly and willingly"? I doubt it.

Maybe they could get obstruction of justice or evidence tampering if that pill was thrown in there to avoid prosecution, but i doubt they'd get a drug conviction for possession of more than the single pill. Even so, the physical evidence would be very weak (to be punny).

Trampy