------------------------------------------------------------------- NORML Weekly News Release (House Republicans Continue Assault On States' Rights, Medical Marijuana Research - House Judiciary Okays Resolution Calling Marijuana A 'Dangerous And Addictive Drug'; Canadian Farmers Will Grow Commercial Hemp Plots For First Time In 50 Years, Health Minister Vows At Agriculture Conference; Nearly Half Of All Americans Say That Marijuana Is "Hot" In Annual Poll) From: NORMLFNDTN (NORMLFNDTN@aol.com) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 11:09:44 EST Subject: NORML WPR 3/5/97 (II) A NON-PROFIT LEGAL, RESEARCH, AND EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATION THE NORML FOUNDATION 1001 CONNECTICUT AVENUE NW SUITE 710 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036 T 202-483-8751 o F 202-483-0057 E-MAIL NORMLFNDTN@AOL.COM Internet http://www.norml.org . . . a weekly service for the media on news items related to marijuana prohibition. March 5, 1998 House Republicans Continue Assault On States' Rights, Medical Marijuana Research House Judiciary Okays Resolution Calling Marijuana a "Dangerous And Addictive Drug" March 5, 1998, Washington, D.C.: A coalition of Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee approved a "sense of the House of Representatives" resolution on Wednesday stating that "marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug and should not be legalized for medical use." House Resolution 372 -- introduced by Crime Subcommittee chair Bill McCollum (R-Fla.) -- was approved by a voice vote despite efforts by several Democrats to kill or amend the measure. "Medical marijuana is a public health issue," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who vigorously argued against the bill. "[It] is not part of the 'War on Drugs.'" Also speaking in opposition to the measure were Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), ranking Democrat on the committee, and Reps. William Delahunt (D-Mass.), Barney Frank (D-Mass.), Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), Martin Meehan (D-Mass.), and Melvin Watt (D-N.C.). Before passing the resolution, Republicans rejected an amendment offered by Rep. Conyers that stated "States have the primary responsibility for protecting the health and safety of their citizens, and the Federal Government should not interfere with any state's policy (as expressed in a legislative enactment or referendum) which authorizes persons with AIDS or cancer to pursue, upon the recommendation of a licensed physician, a course of treatment for such illness that includes the use of marijuana." Republicans also rejected an amendment proposed by Rep. Martin Meehan (D-Mass.) calling on the House of Representatives to "consider this issue ... deserving of further study." Republicans argued that any lifting of the legal ban prohibiting marijuana, even for medical purposes, would send mixed and potentially dangerous messages to the American public about drug use. Rep. McCollum -- who sponsored legislation to permit the legal use of medical marijuana in 1981 and 1983 -- further charged that it would be "counterproductive" for Congress to encourage medical marijuana research or request the Food and Drug Administration to review the drug's prohibitive status. "[I] do not want to go on record supporting another study [on medical marijuana,]" McCollum said. "[Congress] must send a clear message [that] ... marijuana is a highly addictive Schedule I drug ... with no likelihood of FDA approval." Rep. McCollum also said that he no longer supports the stance he took in the 1980s when he urged the federal government to make marijuana legal as a medicine. "The Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are willing to ignore the science and deny an effective medication to seriously ill patients in order to advance their political agenda," charged NORML Executive Director R. Keith Stroup, Esq. For example, Stroup noted that Rep. James Rogan (R-Calif.) voted for the resolution despite declaring that he observed a seriously ill family member successfully use marijuana as a medicine. Two Democrats who opposed the resolution also gave personal testimonials of a friend or family member's battle with terminal illness. One representative also admitted that her friend found therapeutic relief from marijuana. "Republicans apparently are not willing to let scientific evidence, compassion, or common sense get in the way of arresting and jailing marijuana smokers -- even those who are seriously or terminally ill," Stroup said. The resolution now goes for consideration before the full House. For more information or a copy of House Res. 372, please contact either Keith Stroup or Paul Armentano of NORML @ (202) 483-5500. *** Canadian Farmers Will Grow Commercial Hemp Plots For First Time In 50 Years, Health Minister Vows At Agriculture Conference March 5, 1998, Toronto, Ontario: Commercial cultivation of industrial hemp will be legal nationwide early next month, Federal Health Minister Allan Rock vowed at a recent meeting of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture. Rock said that he is ready to formally approve regulations released in December by the Canadian Department of Health (Health Canada) to permit farmers to engage in wide-scale farming of the crop. "I'm pleased to report that by the beginning of next month, the cultivation of industrial hemp will be legal in Canada," he said. Since 1995, Canada has licensed a limited number of farmers to cultivate small test plots of industrial hemp for research purposes. The forthcoming regulations will allow farmers to grow commercial plots of the crop for the first time in 50 years. According to a preliminary draft of the regulations published on the Health Canada website, anyone growing, processing, or exporting hemp will have to possess a license from the agency. The regulations also mandate that farmers may not grow the crop within one kilometer of school grounds or any public place frequented by persons under eighteen years of age. Industrial hemp must be stored in a locked container or location, and samples of crop have to be tested at a laboratory to determine THC content. Health Canada defines industrial hemp as a variety of the cannabis plant with less than 0.3 percent THC. Sally Rutherford, Executive Director of the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, which represents 200,000 farm families nationwide, praised the upcoming change in federal law. "[Hemp] provides another commodity that people can produce and there appears to be a growing market for it," she said. "For people looking for diversified crops to grow, it is good news." Senator Lorna Milne -- who has pushed for changing Canada's hemp laws for several years -- called hemp "an opportunity for Canadian farmers unmatched in this century." A spokesman for the health minister said that there will be "minor adjustments" to the proposed hemp regulations, but would not comment on what those changes may be. Presently in the United States, farmers may not grow industrial hemp -- even for research purposes -- it is illegal under federal law. According to a 1995 United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) "white paper," the Drug Enforcement Administration remains "opposed to any consideration of hemp as a legitimate fiber or pulp product." The report further added that "legal issues" preclude the USDA from growing test plots of the crop for scientific purposes. For more information, please contact either Paul Armentano or Allen St. Pierre of the NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. *** Nearly Half Of All Americans Say That Marijuana Is "Hot" In Annual Poll March 5, 1998, New York, NY: Almost one out of every two Americans say that marijuana is "in," according to a new Roper Starch survey about what's hot and what's not. The study involved face to face interviews nationwide with 2,000 representative adults age 18 or older. Allen St. Pierre, Executive Director of The NORML Foundation, called the response "remarkable." "After 60 years of a blanket prohibition on marijuana, and despite the existence of a myriad of civil and criminal punishments, the plant still enjoys wide social approval," he said. "As reform minded organizations such as The NORML Foundation better educate America about the harm associated with marijuana prohibition, public attitudes about marijuana will continue to move from one of dissonance to social change." Respondents ranked marijuana as one of the nation's thirty hottest items. Roper Starch Worldwide is one of the nation's largest market research and consulting firms. For more information, please contact either Dick Altman of Roper Starch Worldwide @ (212) 697-2620 or Allen St. Pierre of The NORML Foundation @ (202) 483-8751. -END- MORE THAN 11 MILLION MARIJUANA ARRESTS SINCE 1965...ANOTHER EVERY 49 SECONDS!
------------------------------------------------------------------- The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act (Text Of Ballot Initiative Filed In Salem By Oregonians For Medical Rights)From: "sburbank" (email@example.com) To: "Phil Smith" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Oregon medical marijuana initiative Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 07:15:53 -0800 It's filed folks. Now we get to see if we'll have time to gather signatures If there is a challenge, we may be in trouble. Keep your fingers crossed. Sandee *** The Oregon Medical Marijuana Act SECTION 1. Sections 1 through 19 of this Act shall be known as the Oregon Medical Marijuana Act. SECTION 2. The people of the state of Oregon hereby find that: (1) Patients and doctors have found marijuana to be an effective treatment for suffering caused by debilitating medical conditions, and therefore, marijuana should be treated like other medicines; (2) Oregonians suffering from debilitating medical conditions should be allowed to use small amounts of marijuana without fear of civil or criminal penalties when their doctors advise that such use may provide a medical benefit to them and when other reasonable restrictions are met regarding that use; (3) Sections 1 to 19 of this Act are intended to allow Oregonians with debilitating medical conditions who may benefit from the medical use of marijuana to be able to discuss freely with their doctors the possible risks and benefits of medical marijuana use and to have the benefit of their doctor's professional advice; and (4) Sections 1 to 19 of this Act are intended to make only those changes to existing Oregon laws that are necessary to protect patients and their doctors from criminal and civil penalties, and are not intended to change current civil and criminal laws governing the use of marijuana for nonmedical purposes. SECTION 3. As used in sections 1 to 19 of this Act: (1) "Attending physician" means a physician licensed under ORS chapter 677 who has primary responsibility for the care and treatment of a person diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition. (2) "Debilitating medical condition" means: (a) Cancer, glaucoma, positive status for human immunodeficiency virus or acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or treatment for these conditions; (b) A medical condition or treatment for a medical condition that produces, for a specific patient, one or more of the following: (i) Cachexia; (ii) Severe pain; (iii) Severe nausea; (iv) Seizures, including but not limited to seizures caused by epilepsy; or (v) Persistent muscle spasms, including but not limited to spasms caused by multiple sclerosis; or (c) Any other medical condition or treatment for a medical condition adopted by the division by rule or approved by the division pursuant to a petition submitted pursuant to section 14 of this Act. (3) "Delivery" has the meaning given that term in ORS 475.005. (4) "Designated primary caregiver" means an individual eighteen years of age or older who has significant responsibility for managing the well-being of a person who has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition and who is designated as such on that person's application for a registry identification card or in other written notification to the division. "Designated primary caregiver" does not include the person's attending physician. (5) "Division" means the Health Division of the Oregon Department of Human Resources. (6) "Marijuana" has the meaning given that term in ORS 475.005. (7) "Medical use of marijuana" means the production, possession, delivery, or administration of marijuana, or paraphernalia used to administer marijuana, as necessary for the exclusive benefit of a person to mitigate the symptoms or effects of his or her debilitating medical condition. (8) "Production" has the same meaning given that term in ORS 475.005. (9) "Registry identification card" means a document issued by the division that identifies a person authorized to engage in the medical use of marijuana and the person's designated primary caregiver, if any. (10) "Usable marijuana" means the dried leaves and flowers of the plant Cannabis family Moraceae, and any mixture or preparation thereof, that are appropriate for medical use as allowed in sections 1 to 19 of this Act. "Usable marijuana" does not include the seeds, stalks and roots of the plant. (11) "Written documentation" means a statement signed by the attending physician of a person diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition or copies of the person's relevant medical records. SECTION 4. (1) Except as provided in sections 5 and 11 of this Act, a person engaged in or assisting in the medical use of marijuana is excepted from the criminal laws of the state for possession, delivery or production of marijuana, aiding and abetting another in the possession, delivery or production of marijuana or any other criminal offense in which possession, delivery or production of marijuana is an element if the following conditions have been satisfied: (a) The person holds a registry identification card issued pursuant to this section, has applied for a registry identification card pursuant to subsection (9) of this section, or is the designated primary caregiver of a cardholder or applicant; and (b) The person who has a debilitating medical condition and his or her primary caregiver are collectively in possession of, delivering or producing marijuana for medical use in the amounts allowed in section 7 of this Act. (2) The division shall establish and maintain a program for the issuance of registry identification cards to persons who meet the requirements of this section. Except as provided in subsection (3) of this section, the division shall issue a registry identification card to any person who pays a fee in the amount established by the division and provides the following: (a) Valid, written documentation from the person's attending physician stating that the person has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition and that the medical use of marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person's debilitating medical condition; (b) The name, address and date of birth of the person; (c) The name, address and telephone number of the person's attending physician; and (d) The name and address of the person's designated primary caregiver, if the person has designated a primary caregiver at the time of application. (3) The division shall issue a registry identification card to a person who is under eighteen years of age if the person submits the materials required under subsection (2) of this section, and one of the person's parents of legal guardians signs a written statement that: (a) The person's attending physician has explained to the person and to one of the person's parents or legal guardians the possible risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana; (b) The parent or legal guardian consents to the use of marijuana by the person for medical purposes; (c) The parent or legal guardian agrees to serve as the person's designated primary caregiver; and (d) The parent or legal guardian agrees to control the acquisition of marijuana and the dosage and frequency of use by the person. (4) A person applying for a registry identification card pursuant to this section may submit the information required in this section to a county health department for transmittal to the division. A county health department that receives the information pursuant to this subsection shall transmit the information to the division within five days of receipt of the information. Information received by a county health department pursuant to this subsection shall be confidential and not subject to disclosure, except as required to transmit the information to the division. (5) The division shall verify the information contained in an application submitted pursuant to this section and shall approve or deny an application within thirty days of receipt of the application. (a) The division may deny an application only for the following reasons: (i) The applicant did not provide the information required pursuant to this section to establish his or her debilitating medical condition and to document his or her consultation with an attending physician regarding the medical use of marijuana in connection with such condition, as provided in subsections (2) and (3) of this section; or (ii) The division determines that the information provided was falsified. (b) Denial of a registry identification card shall be considered a final division action, subject to judicial review. Only the person whose application has been denied, or, in the case of a person under the age of eighteen years of age whose application has been denied, the person's parent or legal guardian, shall have standing to contest the division's action. (c) Any person whose application has been denied may not reapply for six months from the date of the denial, unless so authorized by the division or a court of competent jurisdiction. (6) (a) If the division has verified the information submitted pursuant to subsections (2) and (3) of this section and none of the reasons for denial listed in subsection (5)(a) of this section is applicable, the division shall issue a serially numbered registry identification card within five days of verification of the information. The registry identification card shall state: (i) The cardholder's name, address and date of birth; (ii) The date of issuance and expiration date of the registry identification card; (iii) The name and address of the person's designated primary caregiver, if any; and (iv) Such other information as the division may specify by rule. (b) When the person to whom the division has issued a registry identification card pursuant to this section has specified a designated primary caregiver, the division shall issue an identification card to the designated primary caregiver. The primary caregiver's registry identification card shall contain the information provided in subsection 4(6)(a)(i)-(iv). (7) (a) A person who possesses a registry identification card shall: (i) Notify the division of any change in the person's name, address, attending physician or designated primary caregiver; and (ii) Annually submit to the division: (A) updated written documentation of the person's debilitating medical condition; and (B) the name of the person's designated primary caregiver if a primary caregiver has been designated for the upcoming year. (b) If a person who possesses a registry identification card fails to comply with this subsection, the card shall be deemed expired. If a registry identification card expires, the identification card of any designated primary caregiver of the cardholder shall also expire. (8) A person who possesses a registry identification card pursuant to this section and who has been diagnosed by the person's attending physician as no longer having a debilitating medical condition shall return the registry identification card to the division within seven calendar days of notification of the diagnosis. Any designated primary caregiver shall return his or her identification card within the same period of time. (9) A person who has applied for a registry identification card pursuant to this section but whose application has not yet been approved or denied, and who is contacted by any law enforcement officer in connection with his or her administration, possession, delivery or production of marijuana for medical use may provide to the law enforcement officer a copy of the written documentation submitted to the division pursuant to subsections (2) or (3) of this section and proof of the date of mailing or other transmission of the documentation to the division. This documentation shall have the same legal effect as a registry identification card until such time as the person receives notification that the application has been approved or denied. SECTION 5. (1) No person authorized to possess, deliver or produce marijuana for medical use pursuant to sections 1 to 19 of this Act shall be excepted from the criminal laws of this state or shall be deemed to have established an affirmative defense to criminal charges of which possession, delivery or production of marijuana is an element if the person, in connection with the facts giving rise to such charges: (a) Drives under the influence of marijuana as provided in ORS 813.010; (b) Engages in the medical use of marijuana in a public place as that term is defined in ORS 161.015, or in public view; (c) Delivers marijuana to any individual who the person knows is not in possession of a registry identification card; or (d) Delivers marijuana for consideration to any individual, even if the individual is in possession of a registry identification card. (2) In addition to any other penalty allowed by law, a person who the division finds has willfully violated the provisions of sections 1 to 19 of this Act or rules adopted under sections 1 to 19 of this Act may be precluded from obtaining or using a registry identification card for the medical use of marijuana for a period of up to six months, at the discretion of the division. SECTION 6. (1) Except as provided in sections 5 and 11 of this Act, it is an affirmative defense to a criminal charge of possession or production of marijuana, or any other criminal offense in which possession or production of marijuana is an element, that the person charged with the offense is a person who: (a) Has been diagnosed with a debilitating medical condition and been advised by his or her attending physician the medical use of marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of that debilitating medical condition; (b) Is engaged in the medical use of marijuana; and (c) Possesses or produces marijuana only in the amounts allowed in section 7 (1) of this Act, or in excess of those amounts if the person proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the greater amount is medically necessary to mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person's debilitating medical condition. (2) It is not necessary for a person asserting an affirmative defense pursuant to this section to have received a registry identification card in order to assert the affirmative defense established in this section. (3) No person who claims that marijuana provides medically necessary benefits and who is charged with a crime pertaining to such use of marijuana shall be precluded from presenting a defense of choice of evils, as set forth in ORS 161.200, or from presenting evidence supporting the necessity of marijuana for treatment of a specific disease or medical condition, provided that the amount of marijuana at issue is no greater than permitted under section 7 of this Act. SECTION 7. (1) A person who possesses a registry identification card issued pursuant to section 4 of this Act may engage in, and a designated primary caregiver of such a person may assist in, the medical use of marijuana only as justified to mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person's debilitating medical condition. Except as allowed in subsection (2) of this section, a registry identification cardholder and that person's designated primary caregiver may not collectively possess, deliver or produce more than the following: (a) If the person is present at a location at which marijuana is not produced, including any residence associated with that location, one ounce of usable marijuana; and (b) If the person is present at a location at which marijuana is produced, including any residence associated with that location, three mature marijuana plants, four immature marijuana plants and one ounce of usable marijuana per each mature plant. (2) If the individuals described in subsection (1) of this section possess, deliver or produce marijuana in excess of the amounts allowed in subsection (1) of this section, such individuals are not excepted from the criminal laws of the state but may establish an affirmative defense to such charges, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the greater amount is medically necessary to mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person's debilitating medical condition. (3) The Health Division shall define by rule when a marijuana plant is mature and when it is immature for purposes of this section. SECTION 8. (1) Possession of a registry identification card or designated primary caregiver identification card pursuant to section 4 of this Act shall not alone constitute probable cause to search the person or property of the cardholder or otherwise subject the person or property of the cardholder to inspection by any governmental agency. (2) Any property interest possessed, owned or used in connection with the medical use of marijuana or acts incidental to the medical use of marijuana that has been seized by state or local law enforcement officers shall not be harmed, neglected, injured or destroyed while in the possession of any law enforcement agency. No such property interest may be forfeited under any provision of law providing for the forfeiture of property other than as a sentence imposed after conviction of a criminal offense. Marijuana and paraphernalia used to administer marijuana that was seized by any law enforcement officer shall be returned immediately upon a determination by the district attorney in whose county the property was seized, or his or her designee, that the person from whom the marijuana or paraphernalia used to administer marijuana was seized is entitled to the protections contained in sections 1 to 19 of this Act. Such determination may be evidenced, for example, by a decision not to prosecute, the dismissal of charges, or acquittal. SECTION 9. No attending physician may be subjected to civil penalty or discipline by the Board or Medical Examiners for: (1) Advising a person whom the attending physician has diagnosed as having a debilitating medical condition, or a person who the attending physician knows has been so diagnosed by another physician licensed under ORS chapter 677, about the risks and benefits of medical use of marijuana or that the medical use of marijuana may mitigate the symptoms or effects of the person's debilitating medical condition, provided the advice is based on the attending physician's personal assessment of the person's medical history and current medical condition; or (2) Providing the written documentation necessary for issuance of a registry identification card under section 4 of this Act, if the documentation is based on the attending physician's personal assessment of the applicant's medical history and current medical condition and the physician has discussed the potential medical risks and benefits of the medical use of marijuana with the applicant. SECTION 10. No professional licensing board may impose a civil penalty or take other disciplinary action against a licensee based on the licensee's medical use of marijuana in accordance with the provisions of sections 1 to 19 of this Act or actions taken by the licensee that are necessary to carry out the licensee's role as a designated primary caregiver to a person who possesses a lawful registry identification card issued pursuant to section 4 of this Act. SECTION 11. Nothing in sections 1 to 19 of this Act shall protect a person from a criminal cause of action based on possession, production, or delivery of marijuana that is not authorized by sections 1 to 19 of this Act. SECTION 12. (1) The division shall create and maintain a list of the persons to whom the division has issued registry identification cards pursuant to section 4 of this Act and the names of any designated primary caregivers. Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the list shall be confidential and not subject to public disclosure. (2) Names and other identifying information from the list established pursuant to subsection (1) of this section may be released to: (a) Authorized employees of the division as necessary to perform official duties of the division; and (b) Authorized employees of state or local law enforcement agencies, only as necessary to verify that a person is a lawful possessor of a registry identification card or that a person is the designated primary caregiver of such a person. SECTION 13. (1) If a person who possesses a registry identification card issued pursuant to section 4 of this Act chooses to have a designated primary caregiver, the person must designate the primary caregiver by including the primary caregiver's name and address: (a) On the person's application for a registry identification card; (b) In the annual updated information required under section 4 of this Act; or (c) In a written, signed statement submitted to the division. (2) A person described in this section may have only one designated primary caregiver at any given time. SECTION 14. Any person may submit a petition to the division requesting that a particular disease or condition be included among the diseases and conditions that qualify as debilitating medical conditions under section 3 of this Act. The division shall adopt rules establishing the manner in which the division will evaluate petitions submitted under this section. Any rules adopted pursuant to this section shall require the division to approve or deny a petition within 180 days of receipt of the petition by the division. Denial of a petition shall be considered a final division action subject to judicial review. SECTION 15. The division shall adopt all rules necessary for the implementation and administration of sections 1 to 19 of this Act. SECTION 16. Nothing in sections 1 to 19 of this Act shall be construed to require: (1) A government medical assistance program or private health insurer to reimburse a person for costs associated with the medical use of marijuana; or (2) An employer to accommodate the medical use of marijuana in any workplace. SECTION 17. The division may take any actions on or before the effective date of this Act that are necessary for the proper and timely implementation and administration of sections 1 to 19 of this Act. SECTION 18. Any section of this Act being held invalid as to any person or circumstance shall not affect the application of any other section of this Act that can be given full effect without the invalid section or application. SECTION 19. All provisions of this Act shall apply to acts or offenses committed on or after December 3, 1998, except that sections 4, 12 and 14 shall become effective on May 1, 1999.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Oregon Medical Marijuana Initiative Criticism (Comments By List Subscriber) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 02:36:47 EST Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Robert.Goodman@godi.adirondack.fidonet.org (Robert Goodman) To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: OMMI criticism The Oregon Medical Marijuana Initiative was kindly forwarded by email@example.com (Arthur Livermore). I see by it that AMR has been technically improving their meausres. However, I'd like someone to pass along these questions to Sandee Burbank: In the definitions it says: > (4)..."Designated primary caregiver" does not include the > person's attending physician. But then later: > SECTION 10. No professional licensing board may impose a civil > penalty or take other disciplinary action against a licensee > based on the licensee's medical use of marijuana in accordance > with the provisions of sections 1 to 19 of this Act or actions > taken by the licensee that are necessary to carry out the > licensee's role as a designated primary caregiver.... Did somebody goof, or does section 10 refer only to professional licensees OTHER THAN physicians? That aside, what's the reason for excluding physicians as potential primary caregivers? It'd seem to me that if there's anyone voters would allow to grow medical marijuana, it'd be doctors. > SECTION 4. (1) Except as provided in sections 5 and 11 of this > Act, a person engaged in or assisting in the medical use of > marijuana is excepted from the criminal laws of the state.... Although section 8 has a provision for RETURN of seized property, I don't see any provision that the marijuana itself not be subject to seizure under a libel action. For instance, the pharmacy law of Oregon may make marijuana held by a caregiver subject to seizure as an "adulterated" drug or some such. It's even possible that the entire pharmacy law isn't considered part of the "criminal laws", although it might include criminal penalties for violations. For instance, New York's consolidated statutes include a voluminous title whose NAME is "Criminal Law", but there are many other titles which include criminal provisions, including those related to pharmacy (which is under the "Education Law" title because that's where proffessional licensure provisions are). So if a New York bill referred to "criminal laws", I couldn't predict whether that'd be construed as the "Criminal Law" or all laws with criminalizing clauses. Farther along this section says: > (a)The division may deny an application only for the following > reasons: (i)The applicant did not provide the information > required pursuant to this section.... and then, > (c)Any person whose application has been denied may not reapply > for six months from the date of the denial, unless so > authorized by the division or a court of competent > jurisdiction. I've warned AMR about this one. Someone could make a very technical violation in the application for the card. The division would obviously have to deny the application, even though it says above only "...MAY deny an application ONLY for..." But then the applicant is SOL for 6 mos. What's the purpose of this provision? Afraid of harassing paperwork deluging the division? If so, why not limit the 6 mo. time out to cases of frivolous applications? Section 8 includes: > (2)Any property interest possessed, owned or used in connection > with the medical use of marijuana or acts incidental to the > medical use of marijuana that has been seized by state or local > law enforcement officers shall not be harmed, neglected, > injured or destroyed while in the possession of any law > enforcement agency. No such property interest may be forfeited > under any provision of law providing for the forfeiture of > property other than as a sentence imposed after conviction of a > criminal offense. Marijuana and paraphernalia used to > administer marijuana that was seized by any law enforcement > officer shall be returned immediately upon a determination by > the district attorney in whose county the property was seized, > or his or her designee, that the person from whom the marijuana > or paraphernalia used to administer marijuana was seized is > entitled to the protections contained in sections 1 to 19 of > this Act. Such determination may be evidenced, for example, by > a decision not to prosecute, the dismissal of charges, or > acquittal. Maybe there should also a provision preventing such seizure in the first place. It may be considered an abuse of authority if someone carrying med mj and presenting an ID card had material seized pursuant to the criminal law provisions to which this initiative is addressed. However, as I indicate above, there may be OTHER provisions of law (e.g., "adulterated drug" pharmacy laws) which plausibly authorize such a seizure, even though it be ultimately fruitless under the provision above. I may be paranoid about this, but I see the possibility of a revolving door of marijuana operated by a recalcitrant police agency. Robert *** Fidonet: Robert Goodman 1:2625/141 Internet: Robert.Goodman@godi.adirondack.fidonet.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- Court Widens Police Search Powers ('The Oregonian' Notes US Supreme Court Wednesday Made A Unanimous And Final Ruling In A 1994 Case From Boring, Oregon, That Overturns Oregon Judge's Decision And Expands Rights Of Police Officers - If Armed With A Search Warrant, They Can Now Kick Down Your Door Without Even Knocking) Found at oregonlive.com letters to editor: firstname.lastname@example.org The Oregonian Portland, Oregon March 5, 1998 Court widens police search powers In a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court uses a Boring man's case to expand police search powers By Ashbel S. Green of The Oregonian staff The U.S. Supreme Court used an Oregon case Wednesday to expand the ability of police officers armed with a search warrant to kick down a door without knocking. In a unanimous ruling, the court overturned an Oregon judge's decision to exclude from evidence weapons seized during a 1994 raid of a Boring man's home. Under the Fourth Amendment's protection from unreasonable search and seizure, police officers armed with a search warrant must announce their presence and give the occupants a chance to come to the door. Only after a reasonable amount of time has passed can officers enter the house by opening the door or kicking it down. In recent years, the Supreme Court has adopted three exceptions under which the police can use the element of surprise: if announcing their presence could put officers in danger, lead to the destruction of evidence or allow a suspect to escape. Cutting a finer line, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said that officers kicking down the door must meet a heavier burden of proof that their safety is in danger, for example, than must officers who open a window and sneak in. The U.S. Supreme Court now says police don't need to make that distinction. They can just go in. Stephen F. Peifer, an assistant U.S. Attorney in Portland, said the ruling simplified a rule that had applied to law enforcement across the vast 9th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which stretches from Arizona to Alaska. "I can tell you that it's already being well-received in the law enforcement community because it applies a simpler rule that can be better understood and applied," Peifer said. "Prior to this ruling today, officers were in a quandary as to what level of proof they needed to have to force entry when not knocking and announcing." That distinction had prevented Peifer from prosecuting Boring resident Hernan Ramirez since his arrest on weapons charges in 1994. Federal agents were looking for a fugitive named Alan Shelby who had escaped from Tillamook County sheriff's deputies on Nov. 1, 1994. An informant said he saw someone he thought was Shelby at Ramirez' home in Boring. The informant also said that Shelby might have a stash of guns. Shelby, facing a federal prison sentence, had threatened that he would "not do federal time." Federal agents got a warrant. On the morning of Nov. 4, agents simultaneously announced their presence through a bullhorn and broke a window in the garage. Ramirez, who was asleep along with his wife and a child, thought burglars were breaking in. He grabbed a gun and fired. After realizing that it was the police, he surrendered. Federal agents seized the gun. After learning that Ramirez was an ex-felon, agents arrested him on an accusation of being an ex-felon in possession of a handgun. Shelby was not in the house. U.S. District Judge Ancer L. Haggerty threw out the gun as evidence because the search was improper under the 9th Circuit rule. The government appealed, but the 9th Circuit affirmed Haggerty's ruling. Ramirez' attorney, Michael R. Levine, argued before the Supreme Court in January that the 9th Circuit's distinction was well-reasoned. "What I argued to the court was there's a difference between coming through an open door and breaking down the door," Levine said. Levine argued that the 9th Circuit rule helped protect the police, who are more likely to get shot when surprised homeowners think that burglars are breaking in. "The whole function of the knock-and-announce rule is to protect the police as much as it is the homeowners," Levine said. The Supreme Court sided with the government, which argued that police who need to use surprise for their safety should not have to meet a heavier burden of proof if the window is latched. "Whether such 'reasonable suspicion' exists depends in no way whether police must destroy property in order to enter," wrote Chief Justice William Rehnquist. Ramirez is in federal prison on subsequent drug charges, Peifer said. No trial date has been set on the weapons charges.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Court Decision - Narcs Must Return Marijuana (List Subscriber Posts Text Of Mendocino County, California Municipal Judge Henry M. Nelson's Court Order Directing The Sheriff To Return 300 Grams Of Medical Marijuana To A Patient Protected Under Proposition 215) Date: Sat, 21 Mar 1998 19:33:58 EST Originator: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org From: email@example.com To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: Court Decision: Narcs Must Return Marijuana [Sender's note:] Yo Talkers etc., This is an important court decision for every one using medical marijuana in California. should keep a copy handy in case Reefer Madness enters your life. This is the first court decision (I think) forcing a PD to return marijuana to a patient after a raid. The case law is all settled here, so any judge should force the narcs to return your medicine once they become aware of this precedent! This can save you from some dumb lawyering! R Givens *** MENDOCINO COUNTY COORDINATED COURTS STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA No. 97-77843 ORDER DISCHARGING EMERGENCY PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDATE Plaintiff and Petitioner vs. MUNICIPAL COURT, COUNTY OF MENDOCINO CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH BROWN Real Party in Interest This matter came on for hearing this date, Mr. Michael D. O'Reilley appearing for the petitioner, Ms. Hannah Nelson appearing for the respondent. The facts of this case as presented by the parties appearing from the court file reveals that the Mendocino County District Attorney filed a felony complaint charging respondent and a co-defendant (who is now deceased) with three counts of various felony charges involving the cultivation and possession of marijuana. On August 1, 1997, the prosecution moved for dismissal of the complaint which was granted pursuant to Penal Code Section 1385. As represented by the parties before the court, the dismissal was sought by the prosecution upon presentation to the District Attorney of a letter from the respondent's physician stating that because this patient experiences adverse side effects from normal medication, the use of marijuana as an analgesic for his back pain is appropriate and recommended. (Exhibit D attached to the petition). On December 18, 1997, the magistrate ordered return of the marijuana to the respondent, and the Attorney General filed in this court an emergency petition for issuance of a writ of mandate to set aside the magistrate's order. Essentially, the State's argument is that possession of marijuana for any purpose is still a crime under federal law, and that there is no authority to order the Sheriff to "dispense" this contraband to the public. Further, the prosecution argues that the amount involved (300 grams and 45 growing plants) does not meet the test of being an amount reasonably related to the defendant's medical needs under the standard articulated in People vs. Trippet. 58 CA4th. 1532 To the extent that Health and Safety Code Section 11382.5 is in conflict with federal law is not an issue in this proceeding. Federal authorities historically cede prosecution of small amounts of marijuana to the states. Furthermore, that issue is not addressed in the Trippet decision which implicitly recognizes the validity of Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5. This Court is not inclined to render judgment on this petition that is inconsistent with the decisions of California courts. As to the issue of whether the amount involved here is reasonably related to the respondent's medical needs, it is represented that the 45 growing marijuana plants are now probably dead. The remaining three hundred grams of harvested marijuana constitutes less than a pound. The State has made the decision not to prosecute the respondent in recognition that this amount (and the growing plants) may constitute a defense under Health and Safety Code Section 11362.5 which is implicitly a recognition that the amount is reasonably related to this respondent's medical needs under the standard articulated in Trippet. No evidence has been presented to this court rebutting that determination, and the amount involved is not so much that it would compel a different conclusion. Therefore, this court finds that three hundred grams is reasonably related to the respondent's medical needs. The argument that the magistrate's order forces the Sheriff to illegally dispense marijuana is not well taken. If the State declines to prosecute on the grounds that the respondent legally possessed the marijuana for medical reasons, then the marijuana is no longer "contraband" as contemplated by state law. Based thereon, this Court finds that the magistrate's order did not exceed his jurisdiction, and the Petition for Emergency Writ of Mandate is discharged. Date 3/5/98 Signed Henry M. Nelson, Judge
------------------------------------------------------------------- Cannabis And The Cops (Staff Editorial In 'Orange County Register' Says A Close Reading Of Two Recent California Judicial Rulings Against Dennis Peron's San Francisco Cannabis Cultivators Club Shows The Decisions Were Not Black And White - And Highlights Need For Local Governments To Develop Policies That Make It Possible For Medical Patients To Acquire Cannabis Or Marijuana Legally, In Line With State Law) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:13:13 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: Editorial: Cannabis And The Cops Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: John Black Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: Orange County Register (CA) Section:metro Page: 6 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org CANNABIS AND THE COPS An injunction that might or might not wind up closing the Cannabis Cultivators Club in San Francisco highlights the need for local governments to develop policies that make it possible for medical patients to acquire cannabis or marijuana legally, in line with state law. Two court rulings are relevant here. Last week San Francisco Superior Court Judge David Garcia issued an injunction against the principals of the San Francisco club in response to a request filed by state Attorney General Dan Lungren's office. Judge Garcia based his injunction on a December 12 ruling by the First District Court of Appeals that said Prop.215, passed by voters in 1996, does not overrule other state laws prohibiting possession or sale of marijuana. John Gordnier, a state senior assistant attorney general, told reporters that he expected that all the cannabis clubs in the state would be shut in wake of the December appellate ruling. Not so fast. A close reading of both rulings shows that the judicial decisions were not black-and-white. The December 12 appellate decision actually affirms the legitimacy of Prop. 215 and suggests guidelines for government and "primary cargivers." Judge Garcia's injunction reflects an understanding of the fact and actually offers the club an opportunity to stay in operation. As of Monday, the club had not closed its doors. The ruling says that Dennis Peron and Beth Moore, who run the club "are enjoined from selling, furnishing, storing, administering or giving away marijuana," which sounds unambiguous. But it's preceded by the statement "except as provided in (2) and (3)." Paragraph (2) says the two may possess marijuana for personal use if they have a doctor's recommendation. Paragraph (3) says: "Each of the defendants may, as to a person with whom he or she has the relationship of a bona fide primary caregiver ... provide to that person without receiving anything in return, a quantity of marijuana consistent with the physician's recommended dosage..." So as long as they're not actually selling marijuana directly but giving it away, they apparently can continue operations. Mr. Peron told us Monday that he believes the club's legal position is solid. "We're not selling cannabis, and our bookkeeping reflects this," he told us. "We do charge for the service of acting as designated primary caregiver to our members." The December 12 appellate decision does appear to give the club legally defensible ground. That decision said, for example, that "the trial court thus concluded ... that the thousands of persons who patronized respondents' club, who advised that a physician approved their marijuana use, and who designated respondents or their Cannabis Buyers Club as their 'primary caregiver' conferred that status on respondents." The appellate court further noted that "although the sale and distribution of marijuana remain as criminal offenses ... bona fide primary caregivers for ... patients should not be precluded from receiving bona fide reimbursement for their actual expense of cultivating and furnishing marijuana for the patient's approved medical treatment." This is sensible. Prop. 215 did not try to eliminate laws against marijuana sale and possession, but to create a narrow exception for medical patients with a doctor's recommendation. It directed the government to facilitate a safe and affordable way for patients to get this substance. That's important because otherwise patients will have to rely on the illegal black market. A very few local governments have tried to set up such a system. But it seems that every time someone tries to do it legally, the state attorney general's office tries to close them. This doesn't seem consistent with conscientiously trying to carry out the clearly expressed will of the people.
------------------------------------------------------------------- The DEA's Pitch For Medical Marijuana (Letter To Editor Of 'San Francisco Chronicle' Says That, While The Federal Government Is Doing Everything In Its Power To Deny Medical Marijuana To Sick And Dying People, Apparently To Send The 'Right Message To Our Children,' Politicians And The Media Are Guilty Of A Cultivated Historical And Cultural Amnesia) Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 21:15:01 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US CA: PUB LTE: The DEA's Pitch For Medical Marijuana Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Frank S. World Source: The San Francsisco Chronicle Pubdate: Friday, 5 March 1998 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.sfgate.com/ `THE DEA'S PITCH FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA' Editor -- While the federal government is doing everything in its power to deny medical marijuana to sick and dying people, apparently to send the ``right message to our children,'' politicians and the media are guilty of a cultivated historical and cultural amnesia! The DEA's own law judge, Francis L. Young, concluded in 1988 that ``marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man . . . One must reasonably conclude that there is accepted safety for use of marijuana under medical supervision. To conlude otherwise, on the record, would be unreasonable, arbitrary, and capricious.'' The DEA's own judge concluded this. Please, don't contribute to the hypocrisy, help inform Americans of the facts! With the creation of the FDA in 1970, marijuana was classified as a Schedule I drug, meaning it has zero recognized medicinal value. By always clinging to the Scheduling status, government has kept the public and the media in the dark. It is time for Americans to re-evaluate inconsistent and ineffective drug war strategies, we need to reduce harm, not increase draconian rhetoric! JOSHUA M. SINOWAY Santa Cruz
------------------------------------------------------------------- Four Accused Of Hauling $2 Million In Cocaine ('San Jose Mercury News' Doesn't Say Why California Highway Patrol Stopped Car On Interstate 5 Near Mount Shasta, Nabbing 55 Pounds Of Cocaine) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:29:33 -0800 To: email@example.com From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: 4 Accused Of Hauling $2 Million In Cocaine Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury New (CA) Contact: email@example.com 4 ACCUSED OF HAULING $2 MILLION IN COCAINE California Highway Patrol officers arrested four men suspected of transporting 55 pounds of cocaine on Interstate 5. Officers found $2 million worth of cocaine after stopping a northbound car Tuesday between Mount Shasta and Weed in Shasta County. Eugene McGee and Lefelton Trasler, both 31, and Aaron Wright and Eric Miller, both 26, were arrested on suspicion of trafficking drugs and possessing drugs with intent to sell.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Counties Given Go-Ahead On Tobacco Suit - The Issue - Reimbursement For Medical Costs ('San Jose Mercury News' Says A Federal Judge In San Francisco Ruled Wednesday That Twelve California Counties May Proceed With The First Such Local-Level Lawsuit Accusing Tobacco Companies Of Fraud For Hiding The 'Fact' That Smoking Is Addictive) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:29:33 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: Counties Given Go-Ahead On Tobacco Suit Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury New (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org COUNTIES GIVEN GO-AHEAD ON TOBACCO SUIT The issue: Reimbursement for medical costs. SAN FRANCISCO -- A lawsuit by California counties accusing tobacco companies of fraud can go to trial, a San Francisco federal judge ruled Wednesday. The decision by U.S. District Judge D. Lowell Jensen to deny a dismissal motion is the first in the nation allowing a suit by local governments to proceed, San Francisco City Attorney Louise Renne said. ``I'm obviously pleased,'' Renne said. ``Local government is the first line of defense against the health effects of smoking.'' Along with San Francisco, the plaintiffs include 12 other counties in Northern and Southern California -- including Santa Clara County -- that encompass more than half the state's population. The lawsuit accuses tobacco companies and trade councils of deliberately hiding the fact that smoking is addictive. It also says the companies manipulated nicotine levels. Treatment, Insurance The result, Renne's spokesman Marc Slavin said, is $200 million in annual smoking-related costs incurred by California counties. Most of the cost arises intreating indigents at city hospitals, and health insurance for public employees. ``They refused to disclose the information they had about the addictive nature of their product,'' Slavin said. ``If we had known what they knew when they knew it, we might have taken preventive actions.'' The actions would likely have included smoking restrictions and public education campaigns, he said. Jensen's decision was not unexpected. In a February 1997 ruling, the judge indicated that he would permit certain claims against the tobacco industry to go forward under California law. At that time, Jensen instructed the counties to redo their lawsuit seeking to recover the public costs of treating smoking-related illnesses. In Wednesday's ruling, Jensen essentially rejected the tobacco companies' bid to have that revised lawsuit dismissed. Question Of Proof The judge has nevertheless made it tough for the counties to prevail against the tobacco companies. In last year's ruling, Jensen said that public agencies bringing such suits against the tobacco industry must show that any public health costs were directly caused by smoking-induced illnesses, which may be difficult for the counties to prove conclusively. Dan Collins, a Los Angeles attorney who represents Philip Morris Inc., said tobacco companies were ``obviously disappointed'' but emphasized that the judge has dismisses several claims. ``He has narrowed the case and made clear that they are going to face a daunting task to prove their case,'' Collins said. Slavin says the federal court decision should send a message to Congress, which is considering a national settlement hammered out between states and the tobacco companies. The victory is the second in six months by California communities against the tobacco giants. Last year, R.J. Reynolds Co. agreed to pay $10 million to settle a suit that claimed the Joe Camel advertising campaign had improperly targeted minors. Along with San Francisco and Santa Clara counties, the plaintiffs in the current suit include the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Monterey, Sacramento, San Bernardino, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz, Shasta and Ventura.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Anti-Smoking Effort Lags ('San Jose Mercury News' Notes California's Method Of Using Tobacco Taxes To Insult, Demean And Dehumanize Smokers Will Soon Yield A Television Commercial Defending State's Unique Prohibition On Smoking In Bars) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:29:33 -0800 To: email@example.com From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: Anti-Smoking Effort Lags Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Source: San Jose Mercury New (CA) Contact: email@example.com ANTI-SMOKING EFFORT LAGS Critics Say 3 New Ads Fall Short Of Promises LOS ANGELES -- The Wilson administration had to defend an incomplete ad campaign this week to anti-smoking activists who were disappointed that it wasn't finished. ``This is the most significant health problem affecting Californians,'' said Alan Henderson, president of the American Cancer Society of California. ``We have lost headway, and we are not happy about it.'' The administration wants this year's campaign to be better than last year's, said Jim Stratton, deputy director of prevention services for the state Department of Health Services. Those ads included a television commercial with a woman smoking through a hole in her throat, having lost her larynx to cancer. ``We are working as hard as we can within the confines of this administration,'' Stratton said at a meeting Tuesday of the state's anti-smoking oversight committee. Last year's $22 million campaign was part of a three-year, $67.5 million plan to draw attention to cigarette addiction and the dangers of secondhand smoke. Activists say last year's campaign prompted calls from health officials in Florida, Michigan and Oregon about borrowing the ads. Colleen Stevens, who oversees the campaign, showed the committee two new billboard ads set to go up in a couple of weeks and a TV commercial that is to begin airing today. Committee members, mainly appointed by legislators and the governor, applauded the three new ads but said they fell short of a promise to see the entire campaign for this year. Last year's campaign consisted of 16 radio, TV and billboard ads. ``The concern that I have is that the ad campaign has gotten caught in the bureaucratic treadmill,'' said Stan Glantz, a committee member representing health care employees and professor of medicine at the University of California-San Francisco. ``It's been over a year since any new media has come out, and it looks like it's going to be dragged out.'' The new TV commercial, aimed at garnering support for California's landmark ban on bar and casino smoking, features a bartender saying he doesn't mind listening to people's problems but does mind having to inhale secondhand smoke.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Corcoran Prison Guards Have Advantage, Experts Say ('Orange County Register' Notes Prisoners Who Would Testify At Any Trial Involving California Prison Guards Accused Of Staging Inmate Fights Are At Disadvantage Because Officers Said They Were Only Following Policy, Motives Of Whistle-Blowers Are Suspect, And Courts And Jurors Assume Prisoners Are Liars)Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:13:13 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US CA: Corcoran Prison Guards Have Advantage, Experts Say Sender: email@example.com Newshawk:John W.Black Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source:Orange County Register Section: news,page 4 Contact:(firstname.lastname@example.org) Author:Andy Furillo-Scripps-McClatchy Western Service CORCORAN PRISON GUARDS HAVE ADVANTAGE, EXPERTS SAY COURTS: Testimony from convicts and whistle-blowers in the 1994 case may be highly suspect. Sacramento-The officers said they were only following policy. Some of the whistle-blowers who testified against them might have had questionable motives. And convict testimony contains an inherent credibility problem. These three considerations may present huge barriers between federal prosecutors and criminal convictions in the case against eight Corcoran State Prison officers indicted last week on charges of staging inmate fights as "blood sport" in 1994, according to two Sacramento legal experts. "I can tell you, these are very difficult cases to litigate out," said Don Heller, former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of California, which is prosecuting the case. "The fact is that Corcoran is not a Boy Scout camp. It's had some very vicious criminals, and these guys have tough jobs." Joshua Dressler, a professor at McGeorge School of Law, said that "in any kind of case in which you're dealing with allegations of criminal behavior by people in authority, it's more than ordinarily difficult to obtain successful prosecutions." Especially in prison cases, Dressler said, "where the most obvious candidates for testimony are going to be prisoners." The indictment charged the officers with intentionally releasing inmates from rival prison gangs onto the closely confined exercise yards of the prison's Security Housing Unit, knowing they would fight. One inmate was shot and killed when officers used gunfire to stop one of the battles. Heller said the prosecutors may have trouble proving intent amid the backdrop of a state prison police that puts rival prisoners together in some controlled situations. At issue is the Department of Corrections' "integrated yard policy." First implemented in the 1980s, it mixes inmates from competing prison gangs to determine if the prisoners can handle general-population confinement. The two specific 1994 yard fights cited in the indictment took place under the auspices of the integrated yard policy. In trying to prove intent, prosecutors called on a number of former Corcoran officers to testify in front of a federal grand jury. The credibility of two of them, however, came under attack Monday from a defense attorney in the case. One whistle-blower witness, former Corcoran officer Richard Caruso, was suspended for shooting prisoners in an incident unrelated to those outlined in the indictment. The other whistle-blower, former Corcoran correctional Lt. Steve Rigg, made $8,000 in movie rights related to the prison investigation. Prosecutors haven't said whether they plan to rely on inmate testimony. But it was a prisoner who told the grand jury that he heard officers say, "It's going to be duck-hunting season," in the moments before inmate Preston Tate was shot and killed in the April 1994 yard fight, according to a source familiar with the case. The inmate, Jack Anthony James, who was Tate's cellmate, is serving a 32-year prison term for rape.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Society Is Hypocritical About Users Of Drugs (Letter To Editor Of 'Honolulu Star-Bulletin' About Olympic Snowboarder Ross Rebagliati Says Denying The Achievements Of Drug Users To Send The Right Message To Our Children Is Foolish - To Be Consistent, We Would Have To Censor Works Of Hash Smokers Victor Hugo, Alexandre Dumas, Louisa May Alcott, Yeats, Wilde And Eugene Delacroix, Who Painted 'Liberty Leading The People') Date: Sat, 7 Mar 1998 12:17:44 -0800 To: email@example.com From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US HI: PUB LTE: Honolulu Star Bulletin Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: John McClain Pubdate: Thursday, 5 Mar 1998 Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.starbulletin.com/ SOCIETY IS HYPOCRITAL ABOUT USERS OF DRUGS Regarding the International Olympic Committee's reinstatement of snowboarder Ross Rebagliati's gold medal: Denying the achievements of drug users to send the right message to our children is foolish, unless we do it in a consistent manner. Victor Hugo, Alexandre Dumas and Eugene Delacroix all smoked hashish, so we really should deny the greatness of works like "Les Miserables," "Hunchback of Notre Dame," "The Three Musketeers" and "Count of Monte Cristo." The Delacroix painting of Liberty leading the people: Ban it from our children's textbooks! Get rid of Louisa May Alcott's "Little Women," too, and the works of Yeats and Wilde. These writers smoked hashish, and we should not confuse our children by honoring them. We should also ban those jazz musician postage stamps that our government recently issued, since many of those musicians smoked pot or used heroin. And please stop listening to the Rolling Stones and the Beatles. We must do these things. Only then can we protect our children from that dangerous thing called truth. John McClain (Via the Internet)
------------------------------------------------------------------- No Retrial For Big Isle Marijuana Advocate ('Hawaii Tribune Herald' Notes Judge Dismisses Felony Drug Charge Against Aaron Anderson, Reform Activist Selectively Prosecuted For 25 Pounds Of Legal Hempseeds)Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 11:07:56 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: US HI: No Retrial For Big Isle Marijuana Advocate Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Roger Christie Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: Hawai'i Tribune Herald Author: Crystal Kua Contact: HTrib@interpac.net Mail: Kinoole Street in Hilo, Hawaii Phone: (808) 935-6621 NO RETRIAL FOR BIG ISLE MARIJUANA ADVOCATE Judge Dismisses Drug Charge Against Aaron Anderson Hemp advocate Aaron Anderson walked out of a Hilo courtroom Wednesday with one less thing on his mind-a felony drug charge. Citing the outcome of Anderson's trial last year, budgetary constraints and other reasons, Circuit Judge Greg Nakamura dismissed a 6-year-old indictment charging Anderson with commercial promotion of marijuana, a class B felony with a penalty of up to 10 years in prison. "I don't know how to react," Anderson said outside the courtroom immediately after the ruling. "I never got to this point before." The charge was the result of a 25 pound shipment of hemp seeds Anderson ordered from a mainland company in May 1991. A police dog sniffed out the package after it arrived in Hilo via Federal Express. Anderson has maintained that the seeds he ordered were sterile hemp seeds which he was going to use for food products. But police said marijuana plants sprouted when they grew the seeds. During Anderson's trial last year, the prosecution argued that it didn't matter whether the seeds were sterile because the seeds fit within the definition of marijuana. But the defense argued that there wasn't enough evidence to prove the seeds were indeed marijuana. The judge declared a mistrial after a jury deadlocked at 9 to 3 in favor of acquittal. Anderson had been scheduled for retrial on Setpember 14th, but the defense sought to have the charge dismissed. In his ruling, Nakamura noted the history of the case with Anderson being charged since April 1992. During that time, Anderson has had three different lawyers and the case went up on appeal before being remanded to the Circuit Court for further proceedings. Nakamura said the charge against Anderson was a serious one and that Anderson should have been convicted of the charge based on the evidence. But Nakamura found that Anderson did not intend to grow marijuana plants and the seeds did not contain the active substance commonly referred to as THC. Nakamura also said that law enforcement officials have not prosecuted some Hilo merchants who sell bird seeds containing hemp. Nakamura's ruling also focused on the poutcome of the trial. He said the defense was successful in finding defets in the prosecutions case. But he said he believed the prosecution could have addressed the problems it had with its case in the first trial. Nakamura, however, said that pursuing a second trial at this time would not be a good idea given the "significant budgetary problems" faced by the Judiciary, the Prosecutor's office and the state government. He also noted that the Circuit Court trial calendar in Hilo is filled with major felony cases over the next year including an 8-week murder trial in his curtroom in April as well as the three Dana Ireland trials and a series of trials for defendant Christopher Wilmer. "We believe the judge did the right thing based on the law and the facts of this case," court-appointed defense lawyer Brian DeLima said after the hearing. DeLima said that he believes the prosecution would still have problems if Anderson was retried. "They would have an insurmountable task," he said. "I have concerns that defendants can drag a case through the system and then complain that the case is taking too long," Deputy Prosecutor Kay Iopa said. Iopa, who is also the prosecutor handling the Wilmer cases, said her office and the courts are currently coping with budget constraints mentioned by the judge. Iopa said her office handled this case like any other case that is referred for prosecution. She also said the office would pursue criminal prosecution in the future for similar cases if the facts and the law warrant it. "It's on a case-by-case basis," she said. Anderson said the criminal charge has been a cloud hanging over him for several years, so the judge's ruling lifted a heavy burden. "Now I'm getting ready for our federal trial in July," Anderson said. "We intend to prevail also." Anderson and former co-defendant Roger Christie have filed a $3 million dollar federal lawsuit against the county stemming from their prosecution in the hemp seed case. Christie, who had his charge dismissed by the prosecution, and Anderson allege that they were targeted in this case because of their outspoken pro-marijuana views.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Point Missed (Letter To Editor Of 'Daily Oklahoman' Corrects Assertion That Illegal Drug Laws Are Based On Public Health Concerns, Made By Mark Woodward, Public Information Officer For Oklahoma Bureau Of Narcotics And Dangerous Drugs Control) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 22:55:43 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
, firstname.lastname@example.org From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US OK: PUB LTE: Point Missed Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Rick Meredith Source: Daily Oklohoman Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.oklahoman.com/ Editors note: It looks like the DrugSense FOCUS Alert #56 Oklahoma or Bust, worked. Clifford is responsible, of course, for the Schaffer wing of the Drug Library at http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/ POINT MISSED To The Editor: Mark Woodward, public information officer for the Oklahoma Bureau of Narcotics And Dangerous Drugs Control (''Your Views,'' Feb. 24) missed the point in his letter about drugs. First, drug laws were never about public health. That much is demonstrated by the simple fact that two legal drugs -- alcohol and tobacco -- kill more people every year than all the people killed by all the illegal drugs in the last century. The largest studies ever conducted by the governments of the U.S., the U.K., Canada and Australia tell us that our drug policy is a mistake and should be abandoned. Woodward's information on Europe is in error. As one example, Switzerland is reporting great success with heroin maintenance clinics, and the Swiss people recently voted to continue the heroin clinics. Finally, Prohibition did not materially reduce alcohol problems but simply created a bigger problem with use by children and women and a tremendous increase in violent crime. Following repeal, there was an immediate large drop in the homicide rate. Clifford A. Schaffer, Canyon Country, Calif.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Worker Drug-Testing Bill In Branstad's Hands ('Waterloo Courier' Says Iowa Governor Terry Branstad Is Expected To Sign Republican Bill Allowing Businesses To Test Workers Randomly, Without Cause - Supporter Claims 43 Other States Have Similar Laws) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 22:25:52 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US IA: Worker Drug-Testing Bill In Branstad's Hands Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: "Carl E. Olsen" Source: The Waterloo Courier Author: Eric Stern, Courier Staff Writer Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://wcfcourier.com/ WORKER DRUG-TESTING BILL IN BRANSTAD'S HANDS DES MOINES - The Iowa House sent the governor a drug testing bill Wednesday that allows businesses to test their workers randomly. "It's finally saying we're going to address illegal drugs in the workplace," said Rep. Steve Sukup, R-Dougherty, who steered the bill through the 7 1/2-hour debate. "Forty-three other states have random drug testing laws." The bill passed 53-46 after minority Democrats argued more than 20 amendments to expand protections for workers. Majority Republicans revived an effort last year to rewrite the state's drug testing laws. Current law mandates an employer can test employees randomly with 30 days' notice or "probable cause." The business also must pay for treatment programs. "We're going to change this bad law," Rep. Jeff Lamberti, R-Ankeny, said. Last year's push to strip treatment programs from the law failed to muster votes in the Republican-controlled Senate, but a new version secured the needed votes because it included one-time employer-paid treatment for alcohol and illegal drug use. The bill also exempts small businesses from providing treatment. The bill also lowers the threshold of testing to "reasonable suspicion" from probable cause. "Drug testing is an invasion of an individual's privacy and only a fool would deny that," said Rep. Phil Wise, D-Keokuk. "Protecting public safety vs. privacy -- this is a balance that has to be struck very carefully. We should not err in either direction." Wise also said courts have ruled public employees not in "safety-sensitive" jobs cannot be subject to random drug tests, and private employees should share the same constitutional rights. One of the more heated moments came when an amendment failed 46-52 to allow minors to be tested by people of the same sex. "It does not protect those minors from having an adult of the opposite sex witness the urine test," said Rep. Keith Weigel, D-New Hampton. Rep. Bill Dotzler, D-Waterloo, a union activist and machine operator at Deere & Co., attempted to raise the blood-alcohol minimum for firing an employee in the bill from .04 to .05. "You will give the employer the opportunity to fire you if you have a wine cooler at lunch if you don't weigh 200 pounds," Dotzler said. But Sukup said: "It looks like we're up for 2 1/2 beers for breakfast with this amendment ... "If you are .10, you are legally drunk. This amendment says you can show up to work and be legally drunk and we'll pay for your treatment." A proposal also failed to set up a random drug testing program for state legislators. "Whatever standards we choose to impose on the State of Iowa, we ought to be able to impose on ourselves," said Rep. Ed Fallon, D-Des Moines. "What we're talking about here is sending our workers to the restroom with cup in hand coming back and subjecting themselves to the humiliation and embarrassment of being treated as ... guilty." Gov. Terry Branstad is expected to sign the bill. (c) The Waterloo Courier 1998
------------------------------------------------------------------- Drug Test Proposal Sent To Branstad ('Des Moines Register' Version) Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 14:25:43 -0500 From: "R. Lake"
Subject: MN: US IA: Drug Test Proposal Sent to Branstad To: DrugSense News Service Organization: The Media Awareness Project of DrugSense Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Carl E. Olsen Source: The Des Moines Register Author: Jonathan Roos Page: Front Page Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Webform: http://www.dmregister.com/letter.html Website: http://www.dmregister.com/ DRUG TEST PROPOSAL SENT TO BRANSTAD The governor is expected to approve a measure allowing random drug and alcohol testing. The Iowa Legislature decided Wednesday to expand the authority of employers to test workers for drug or alcohol use. The House, on a 53-46 vote gave final legislative approval to a bill that would allow random testing of workers and would make other significant changes in Iowa's 11-year-old workplace drug-testing law. The measure, one of Gov. Terry Branstad's long-standing priorities, was sent to the governor for his signature. Business groups and some of Iowa's largest companies have been trying for several years to get the Legislature to rewrite a drug-testing law that they regard as weak. Labor groups, fearing that employees' rights would be compromised, have resisted wholesale changes. Supporters of the bill contended Wednesday that employers need greater authority to root out drug users who could jeopardize the safety of others. "We're left with a simple choice. We can ignore drug abuse in the workplace or we can provide the tools to address the situation," said Rep. Steven Sukup, a Dougherty Republican who guided the bill through House debate. "This (bill) will put Iowa in step with other states" that have adopted broader drug-testing laws, Sukup said. Rep. Jeffrey Lamberti, R-Ankeny, agreed. He said the current law "virtually guarantees that effective drug-testing can't exist in the workplace." Critics of the legislation said it would upset the balance between workplace safety requirements and employees' privacy rights. They said the legislation would subject workers to humiliating trips to the restroom to give urine samples, and it could leave them vulnerable to harassment. Rep. Minnette Doderer, D-Iowa City, called it a "stringent, oppressive, unnecessary and even stupid bill." Rep. Michael Cormack of Fort Dodge, the only House Republican who voted against the bill, said it did not respect individual rights. "It doesn't matter if rights are being trampled on by big government or by big business," he said. Rep. Ed. Fallon, D-Des Moines, said lawmakers should get a taste of their own medicine and require drug-testing of the Legislature. His proposal was rejected, however, on a procedural vote. "What we're talking about here is sending our workers to the restroom, with cup in hand, and subjecting them to the humiliation and embarrassment as suspects," Fallon said. "If we're willing to do that to the workers of this state, we ought to be willing to do it to ourselves." Members of the House Democratic minority dominated Wednesday's long debate. They offered a series of amendments to temper some of the drug-testing law changes pushed by Republicans. However, all of the amendments were rejected. Leaders of the House Republican majority said they didn't want to risk having the bill get bogged down because of changes that might be unacceptable to the Senate. The drug-testing legislation cleared the Senate last month by a bare majority of 26 votes. Elements of this year's bill include: Permitting random testing of workers for alcohol and illicit drug use. Lowering the standard for testing an employee outside a random selection program to a "reasonable suspicion" of drug or alcohol use. Expanding the authority of employers to test prospective employees. The bill approved Wednesday applies to workers in the private sector, not public employees. One Democrat - Dolores Mertz of Ottosen - joined 52 Republicans in voting for the measure. Republican Cormack and 45 Democrats were opposed.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Dangerous Drug Raid - Three Detroit Cops Shot, Suspect Killed In Drug Raid - Three Others Caught ('Detroit News' Front Page Digest Says Shooting Began As Cops Began Searching Suspects For Weapons) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 07:50:26 -0800 To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org From: Pat Dolan
Subject: Dangerous Drug Raid 3 Detroit cops shot Newshawk:Pat Dolan Source: Detroit News PubDate: Mar 5 1998 Subject: Dangerous Drug Raid 3 Detroit cops shot Section: Front Page Contact: detnews.com Thursday, March 5, 1998 Dangerous Drug Raid 3 Detroit cops shot: Suspect killed in drug raid -- 3 others caught Three Detroit narcotics officers were shot-one seriously-during a raid Wednesday at a southwest side locksmith shop police said was a front for a drug house. The veteran officers were searching three men for weapons and drugs on the porch of the in the 9100 block of West Fort about 6 p.m. when one of the men pulled an automatic handgun and started shooting, investigators said. Reaction: Families of officers can't stop worrying DETROIT-Detroit narcotics officer James Tolbert walked away from the Persian Gulf war unscathed, but in his daily job of fighting the city's war on drugs, Tolbert almost lost his life. Tolbert was one of three officers shot doing what dozens of officers do day in and day out making raids on drug houses and everything else necessary to keep drugs off Detroit streets. - The neighborhood: Shootings, raids a part of life Shawn Thomas was not shocked Wednesday by the shoot-out that killed one man and injured three Detroit narcotics police officers in her southwest Detroit neighborhood. "Gunshots and drug busts have become a part of our everyday life," said Thomas, 28. "We're so used to hearing (gunshots) that we worry when we don't."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Shootings, Raids A Part Of Life ('Detroit News' Drug War Dispatch Says Shoot-Out In Southwest Detroit Neighborhood Leaves One Man Dead, Three 'Narcotics' Police Officers Wounded) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 21:45:11 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US MI: Shootings, Raids A Part Of Life Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Pat Dolan Source: Detroit News PubDate: Mar 5 1998 Section: Front Page Author: Richard Sheinwald, Associated Press Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.detnews.com/ THE NEIGHBORHOOD: SHOOTINGS, RAIDS A PART OF LIFE Residents Say They Are Worried About Their Kids And Inaction Of Police DETROIT -- Shawn Thomas was not shocked Wednesday by the shoot-out that killed one man and injured three Detroit narcotics police officers in her southwest Detroit neighborhood. "Gunshots and drug busts have become a part of our everyday life," said Thomas, 28. "We're so used to hearing (gunshots) that we worry when we don't." Thomas lives on Springwells, just blocks from where the shootings took place. She worries her two young children may one day be caught in a cross-fire. Thomas said she would move to a better neighborhood "if I could afford it." "The city has got a bad reputation," she said. "The violence is making people leave and that's why we have a lot of abandoned houses." Detroit police are overlooking the southwest side because they don't want to deal with its problems, she said. "Instead of making all of Detroit good, they only want to worry about the pretty side," she said. "They need to go to the worst side and work their way up to the good areas." It's a feeling shared by Edwardo Guitierrez, a 34-year-old mechanic. "If the cops aren't killing (kids) on the streets, they're killed by gang members or drug dealers," he said. "I am a parent and working to clean up the streets so my two kids can have a violent-free life. They have questions just like everyone else. I don't have the answers as to why they have to grow up living this way." Guitierrez has lived in his southwest Detroit neighborhood for 24 years. He said he has watched friends, neighbors and strangers gunned down in broad daylight. "The city does nothing for the kids," he said. "We got nothing and the city isn't giving us anything. Try explaining to your 7-year-old why we have to put milk crates up on trees just to play basketball." Wednesday's shooting was a wake-up call for many southwest Detroit residents who said they are determined to take back control of their streets -- a task some fear will take a long time to accomplish. "People's lives are over because they live in the ghetto," said Juan Martinez, 24. "It's a never-ending story. You just have to do what you can to survive. The streets are mean and so is life." William Poma, 44, remembers growing up on the southwest side when it was safe to play outside. "When I grew up in this neighborhood, it was very beautiful," he said. "Now it's bad and has nothing to offer. "It's gotten to the point where I have to move out. I can't raise my family in a drug and gang-infested neighborhood. I worry about my son. I don't want him to think this is how life should be. I never was up with this sort of lifestyle and I don't think I want my son to be a part of it either." Copyright 1998, The Detroit News
------------------------------------------------------------------- Reaction - Families Of Officers Can't Stop Worrying - Spouse Of Injured Cop Says She Knows Her Husband Loves His Work ('Detroit News' Article About Three 'Narcotics' Police Wounded During Raid) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 08:13:48 -0800 To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org From: Pat Dolan
Subject: Families of officers can't stop worrying Newshawk:Pat Dolan Subject: Families of officers can't stop worrying Source: Detroit News PubDate: Mar 5 1998 Section: Front Page Author: Kristin Storey / The Detroit News Contact: detnews.com (Note: Again this lends itself to comparison with the Capone era for LTEs pd) Thursday, March 5, 1998 Reaction: Families of officers can't stop worrying Spouse of injured cop says she knows her husband loves his work By Kristin Storey / The Detroit News DETROIT -- Detroit narcotics officer James Tolbert walked away from the Persian Gulf war unscathed, but in his daily job of fighting the city's war on drugs, Tolbert almost lost his life. Tolbert was one of three officers shot doing what dozens of officers do day in and day out -- making raids on drug houses and everything else necessary to keep drugs off Detroit streets. They risk their lives on raids similar to the one conducted Wednesday. Others go undercover to set up drug dealers. "They close the doors, they put guns to our heads and we buy the dope," said Detroit narcotics officer Javier Johnson, who is Tolbert's cousin. Soon after the deal ends, more officers arrive to raid the house and arrest the dealers. Unlike the fantasy world of television, police on the street face real consequences when something goes wrong. "People watch TV and (an actor) gets shot but he's back next week filing papers and nothing is said about the injury," Johnson said. "That's not how it works in real life." In real life, people like Tolbert and the others get hurt and their families worry. "I'll probably have a hard time sleeping tonight," said Johnson, who knows many family members are worried about the shooting. Marilyn Stefani's husband, Michael Stefani, was seriously injured in the shooting. She said worrying is part of life for the families of narcotics officers, but she knows her husband loves his work. "If he's not doing it he won't be a whole person," Stefani said. "He had been on hundreds of raids. He was very cautious. I'm confident Mike did everything right. He thinks everything out." Sometimes doing everything right isn't enough, said Johnson, who has been working narcotics for 10 years. "You get that feeling when things aren't going to be right," Johnson said. When they don't go right, it shows. "I saw an officer from (Tolbert's) crew. He is totally and visibly shaken," Johnson said. Johnson knows what the officers were going through. He has seen the aftermath of fellow officers wounded during drug raids. "Two or three days later, all the sudden you realize what happened," he said. "It all comes into focus, and you deal with it." Dealing with it can be talking to other people or asking for a transfer to another unit. Many officers, however, keep fighting the drug war. "Everybody's got a fear of something," Johnson said. "A lot of people fear this. It is something you choose to do." Copyright 1998, The Detroit News [detnews.com]
------------------------------------------------------------------- Reno Open To Daley's Anti-Drug Plan ('Associated Press' Says Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley Pitched To Attorney General Janet Reno In Washington, DC, On Thursday The Idea Of Sending Special Teams Of Federal Prosecutors To Key Cities To Crack Down On Money Laundering By Drug Dealers) Date: Sun, 08 Mar 1998 20:22:20 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US IL: Reno Open to Daley's Anti-Drug Plan Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Source: Associated Press Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 RENO OPEN TO DALEY'S ANTI-DRUG PLAN WASHINGTON (AP) -- Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley pitched to Attorney General Janet Reno on Thursday the idea of sending special teams of federal prosecutors to key cities to crack down on money laundering by drug dealers. Reno was intrigued by the suggestion -- which Daley said he had been floating unsuccessfully to attorneys general and other anti-drug officials since 1980 -- and began looking into whether it could be done even as Daley left their meeting, a senior Justice Department official said. ``She is basically on it,'' said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. ``We're acting now.'' State and local governments can fight street-level drug dealing, but a large-scale federal effort with more authority and resources is needed to target higher-level dealers and their ability to turn drug profits into legitimate assets, Daley told a Justice Department news conference. ``We got the dealers,'' he said. ``But where does the money go? Are there lawyers, are there bankers, are there business people behind the money laundering operations?'' Daley envisions a pilot program modeled on the 1960s strike forces established by then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy to combat organized crime. They answered to Washington instead of local U.S. attorneys, operating only out of a few cities with major mob presences while working with local law enforcement and federal agencies. ``If you trail the money you will have an impact on the drug problem,'' Daley said. To bolster his argument, the mayor cited a recent U.S. Conference of Mayors survey of 15 jurisdictions that showed state and local agencies prosecute by far the most drug cases. In the Chicago area, there were about 36,700 drug prosecutions in the state and local courts, compared with 65 in federal courts. Only two or three of those 65 federal cases involved money laundering charges, Daley said. The Justice Department official said it is difficult to compare local drug cases to the labor-intensive federal prosecutions. Department action on Daley's proposal will depend on the congressional approval needed and how it might affect the department's budget, the official indicated.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Turn In Your Neighbors? (List Subscriber Posts URL For Chicago Cops Who Want You To Do Their Work For Them Busting Marijuana Sellers And Other 'Drug Traffickers' - You Know What To Do) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 10:41:18 -0800 (PST) From: Turmoil
To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: HT: turn in your neighbors? Sender: email@example.com man this web page is kinda scary indeed... http://www.ci.chi.il.us/CommunityPolicing/forms/Narcotics.html
------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinventing American Tobacco Policy - Sounding The Medical Community's Voice (Explicitly Utopian Editorial By Former US Surgeon General C. Everett Koop And Others In 'Journal Of The American Medical Association' Notes Tobacco Use Is Ultimate Underlying Cause Of Nearly One In Every Five Deaths In United States Year After Year - But Seems To Want To Increase That Rate By Urging Fellow Physicians To Lobby Congress For Prohibitionist Policies Disguised As Regulation Of Tobacco Industry) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:13:13 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: JAMA: Editorial: Reinventing American Tobacco Policy: Sounding the Medical Community's Voice Sender: email@example.com Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Source: JAMA Vol. 279, No 7 Editorials REINVENTING AMERICAN TOBACCO POLICY: SOUNDING THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY'S VOICE 1998 may be the most important moment in the history of the tobacco wars, a moment when America chooses between a path toward social repair or one toward irrevocable public loss. Winston Churchill said, "Americans can be counted upon to do the right thing-after trying everything else." This year, Americans may finally do the right thing. After years of growing public and professional awareness of the addictiveness of nicotine of the health effects of tobacco, and of the tobacco industry's extensive efforts to target young children, federal laws may be enacted to seriously weaken the grip of the industry on the public and on the nation's health. Conversely, there is the risk that the tobacco industry could further entrench its ability to stand outside the ordinary rules of commerce in society. In large measure the outcome depends on the strength of the voice and message from the medical and public health professions. We must ensure that protection of the public's health prevails as the foremost issue and becomes the ultimate decision force. Surely there is not a physician who is unaware that the tobacco industry has increased its power and profits by securing a host of special exceptions to the ordinary rules that regulate business practices. Surely there cannot be a physician who believes that it is professionally ethical or socially responsible to be silent as Congress begins to consider how the tobacco industry should do business in the future. It is time to volunteer, to learn, and to speak out. What is achieveable by Congressional action has expanded significantly. Policies once thought undoable are now possible. In part, this is because of recent and growing disclosure of past tobacco industry misconduct and mendacity. In part, this is also because of the extensive work behind closed doors between the tobacco industry and state attorneys general over Medicaid expenses for tobacco-caused illnesses(often referred to as 'the settlement". For whatever r reason, the time has come to break the tobacco industry's long-standing strangle hold on the major institutions of political power in the United States; Now Congress, not the tobacco industry, will determine how this country will clear with tobacco into the next century. But although "the settlement" helped move the public policy clebate d hole it should be-to the US Congress-it is only a private agreement constructed by lawyers. It has no legislative legitimacy. It is a wish list of the parties involved. And it is too low a goal for the nation's health. Can a few hundred billion dollars of tobacco money be used to initiate public health efforts? Of course. If the tobacco industry prevails in Congress, will this money be sufficient and just compensation? Of course not. Even if grossly insufficient, will funds become available? Perhaps, but the tobacco industry is not known for living up to its promises. Why is the tobacco industry so eager to be responsible for distributing funds? Perhaps because such a mechanism bypasses Congressional authority and makes recipients dependent on the tobacco industry no less than tobacco advertising r revemles and philanthropy have done in a host of enterprises. For years, the tobacco industry has marketed products that it knew caused serious disease and death. Yet, it intentionally hid this truth from the public, earl iecl out a deceitful campaign designed to undermine the public's appreciation of these risks and marketed its addictive products to children. The industry long ago knew that nicotine was addictive, but kept its findings secret and consistently denied the fact, even as overwhelming evidence to the contrary eventually emerged. By these actions, the tobacco makers have shown themselves to be a rogue industry, unwilling to abide by ordinary ethical business rules and social standards. Other businesses operate differently. For example, design defects in a motor vehicle are unintentional; when they are discovered, steps are taken to correct them. Nevertheless, such manufacturers are held liable for these mistakes. By contrast, the tobacco industry has intentionally designed and marketed addictive, lethal products and deliberately hidden their well-known risks. These actions are morally r reprehensible. Yet, the tobacco makers have the shamelessness to ask to be excused from om liability for their informed and deliberate actions. How would we respond if the makers of cars knew their gas tanks would explode and their brakes were defective, had hidden these flaws, marketed these vehicles, lied when caught, and then made a similar request? To allow any industry to continue such acts without restriction, indeed weakening or cutting the impediments of oversight and restraint that exist, would be irresponsible in the extreme. No other industry even begins to approach the tobacco industry's ability to market a product of such mass lethality. No other product so massively and effectively injures and kills people as does tobacco, especially cigarettes. Moreover, the industry does so while reaping huge profits by shifting tobacco related health, social, and environmental costs onto the public's shoulders. Incredibly, even though some in the tobacco industry have now acknowledged some smoking-related health consequences and addictive properties, they have offered no apology and have the audacity to deny wrongdoing. Even worse, manufacturers have launched the greatest lobbying campaign ever known, tens of millions of dollars just in 1997, in an attempt to receive from Congress pardons for all its past and future liability. Some of its audacious requests would require making exceptions to the fundamental rights of due process for individuals, while others would override state and community rights. The tobacco industry is doing so in part because it is fearful that damning evidence will be disclosed in trials.2 It is willing to pay any price to prevent internal industry documents from surfacing. Thus, besides its Congressional lobbying, the tobacco industry agreed to pay $14.7 billion to settle the attorneys general suits with Mississippi and Florida, and $15.3 billion with Texas in part because it cannot bear to have its true behavior see the light of day before it secures protection from Congress. If the whole truth were known (and much more may come out during the Minnesota court case), we believe members of Congress would have to distance themselves completely from the industry. Yet, even as public condemnation of the tobacco industry becomes louder and as the public becomes better informed, the industry is continuing with business as usual. It claims that it does not w ant children to smoke and then promotes advertising that appeals primarily to children. It says that it is prepared to live with meaningful government oversight and then fights every local initiative and every tough public health proposal. To keep going, it hires lawyers, advertising agencies and lobbyists at enormous cost and increases campaign contributions w ith an intent to maintain its influence v ith state legislatures and Congress. But Congress is now aware of choices that were not once so apparent. Political leaders from both parties have called for strong action and have introduced far-reaching legislative proposals. However, is the voice of reason being heard against the loud blare of tobacco industry propaganda? How can we ensure that the tobacco industry does not, with its effective, time-proven lobbying effort, undermine effective, comprehensive legislation? In the final analysis, it is the medical and public health community that must take responsibility for keeping the focus on the public's. We must clearly define issues so that both the public and members of Congress understand them and are moved to take the socially responsible course of action. For example, in December 1997, the House of Delegates of the American Medical Association (AMA) adopted policies that enable its leaders to more effectively engage in the legislative development process calling for strong, effective national legislation without kow-towing to the tobacco companies or acquiescing to their demands for legal protection. Such steps give voice to all AMA members and distinguish the organization. Although such steps are essential and commendable, they alone are insufficient. This spring Congress will finally begin to take a serious look at comprehensive tobacco control legislation. We believe each physician has a responsibility to seize this moment in history and to use every means at his or her disposal to convince members of Congress to enact meaningful tobacco legislation. Tobacco use is the ultimate underlying cause of nearly 1 of every 5 deaths in the United States year after year. Our voices should scream with outrage against the fundamental unfairness of the legislative loopholes and special privileges that have allowed the tobacco industry to become the gargantuan, extraordinarily proftable business that it is. It has done so only by discounting horrendous public health losses. We must be persistent in our demand for socially responsible Congressional action. The medical profession and public once reluctantly accepted as fact that half of smokers will die of a smoking-related disease because clinicians could not do much to help smokers quit, avoid relapse, or never start. That attitude is fading away as scientifically sound smoking cessation methods are increasingly integrated into clinical practice.4 Likewise, it was once accepted that the Congress would not act without the acquiescence of the tobacco industry. But that attitude should also fade as the facts about the industry become increasingly known through the exposure of previously secret documents. The Congress need not feel that it has to make any more concessions to this rogue industry. Major issues that each physician should know well, teach, and advocate include: * The protection of Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authority to regulate all areas of nicotine and other constituents and ingredients in tobacco. The FDA should have the authority to increase its tobacco research and scientific communication authority, have greater scope of its regulatory authority as evidence suggests, ancl have adequate funds to implement all its various regulatory, enforcement, public education, and research activities. * The protection of children and youths from wanting and using tobacco. Federal statutes should include measures such as strong and effective warning labels on products; substantial penalties for distributing to youth; increased public education; effective school policies; research including behavioral research on underage tobacco use and countermeasures; an effective system of excise taxes, fines, enforcement methods; and funding for organizations that protect children and youth from tobacco. * The funding of sound programs, established scientifically, are used to help nicotine-dependent individuals quit, be they adults or minors.4,5 Such programs should include meclical financing systems, professional and public education, and behavioral ancl cessation research. Programs should be funded by the tobacco inclustry, but not by means that the tobacco industry could influence. * The refinement and expansion of the regulation of environmental tobacco smoke. Provisions shoulcl include policies and funds for establishing and enforcing smoke-free public and U-ol k environments, public education, and risk assessment research. * The protection of the justice system by disclosure to the public of evidence of past tobacco inclustry misdeeds, such as the recent revelation of the planned marketing to children. This should include preventing the tobacco inclustry from receiving protection against past, present, or future wrongdoing and the funding of systems to investigate misdeeds and deliver justice. * The prevention of federal law from overriding stronger and/or more diverse state and community regulations. Federal law designed to protect public health should always be a floor that state and local governments can and to and strengthen. * The establishment of groundwork for much better accountability and broader control of the tobacco industry in the future, ie, international issues, protection of tobacco farmers and farmland, and the like. Historically, state and local laws have been as effective as, if not more so than, federal statutes. Thus, legislation should include specific statements that ensure that state and local laws that strengthen public health are not vaguely supported in large print and specifically destroyed in small print. Federal public health legislation must be expressed in terms that establish a minimum level of protection above which states and communities are able and encouraged to do much more and to innovate where federal laws are silent. Basically, the tobacco industry seeks 3 fundamental refuges. First, it seeks to protect itself from accountability for past, present, and future wrongdoing. Second, it seeks to diminish or weaken individual and group access to the fundamental right of due process. Third, it seeks to limit federal agencies from having oversight and regulatory authority. It also seeks, through 'the settlement," to obtain a measure of social respectability-to be seen as a responsible member of the business world rather than a group of Corporate renegades that operate outside the bounds of social norms. The extent that the tobacco industry has gone to secure special privilege and protect itself, individually and collectively, from liability from past and future health effects from tobacco use has raised a red fag in the public health community. With such a glaring difference between what is right and wrong for the public, Congress should have little difficulty in choosing a course that contains no deals and no trades. We support tobacco legislation by Congress, but are opposed to granting any concessions to the tobacco industry C Everett Koop, MD David C. Kessler, MD Geolge N. Lundberg, MD 1. Todd JS, Rennie D, McAfee RE, et al. The Brown and Williamson documents: where do we go from here? JAMA 1995;274: 256-258 2. Brandt AM, Richmond JB, Settling short on tobacco:let the trials the trials begin JAMA 1997;278:1028. 3. McGinnis JM, Foege WH, Actual causes 0f death in the th United States. JAMA 1993;270:2207-2212. 4. Cromwell J, Bartosch WJ, Fiore MC, HasseIblad V, Baker T. Cost-effectiveness of the Clinical Practice Recommendations in the AHCPR Guideline for Smoking Cessation. JAJI.1997;278:1759-1766 5. The Smoking Cessation Clinical Practice Guideline Panel and Staff. The Agency for Health Care Policy and Research Smoking Cessation Clinical Ptactice Guideline. JAMA 1996;275:1270-1280
------------------------------------------------------------------- Legalize Marijuana For Medicinal Purposes (Letter To Editor Of 'Daily Gazette' In Schenectady, New York, Responds To US House Subcommittee's Recent Resolution On Scientific Issues Regarding Cannabis - About Which None Of The Republican Politicians Knew Anything)Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:13:13 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: UR NY: PUB LTE: Legalize Marijuana For Medicinal Purposes Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Walter F. Wouk Source: Daily Gazette (Schenectady, NY) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Author: Walter F. Wouk LEGALIZE MARIJUANA FOR MEDICINAL PURPOSES A coalition of Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee's subcommittee on crime has been very active in recent days. They approved a "sense of the House" resolution stating that "marijuana is a dangerous and addictive drug and should not be legalized for medical use." The resolution - introduced by subcommittee chair Bill McCollum (R-Fla.) - won the approval of all seven Republicans present, while being opposed by the two Democrats, Reps. John Conyers (Mich.) and Sheila Jackson Lee (Texas). Ironically, the subcommittee's action came just one day after the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine (IOM) held its third and final symposium on the merits of marijuana therapy. The IOM organized the conferences as part of a federally funded 18-month review of the scientific evidence demonstrating marijuana's therapeutic value. Because legislators have a profound impact upon the daily lives of Americans, they have an ethical obligation to seek out the truth. Mr. McCollum and his Republican cohort have rejected the truth about marijuana - and that truth is that there is no proof that marijuana is either addictive or dangerous. The body of scientific evidence indicates that marijuana is a benign drug. Two years ago, the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet concluded that "the smoking of cannabis, even long term, is not harmful to health." If a gravely ill individual uses marijuana to ease their pain, they will be subject to legal sanctions that include - but are not limited to - fines, imprisonment, loss of driver's license, loss of employment and the seizure of assets under the civil forfeiture laws. The Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are willing to ignore the science and deny an effective medication to the sick and dying in order to advance their political agenda. Note: The writer is president of the Schoharie chapter of National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.
------------------------------------------------------------------- By Default, Jails Become Mental Institutions (Lengthy 'New York Times' Article About The Almost 200,000 People Behind Bars - More Than One In 10 Of The Total - Who Are Known To Suffer From Schizophrenia, Manic Depression Or Major Depression, The Three Most Severe Mental Illnesses - Jails Are Increasingly Used To Warehouse Them - Advocates For Mentally Ill Say The Clock Is Being Turned Back To The 19th Century, When It Was Common In The United States To Confine People With Mental Illness In Jails) Date: Fri, 06 Mar 1998 22:12:44 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: NYT: By Default, Jails Become Mental Institutions Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family Source: New York Times Author: Fox Butterfield Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Editor's note: Chad Thevenot of the Criminal Justice Policy Foundation also sent this item in. At first glance, it appeared to be off topic, and perhaps it is. But the use of the criminal justice system as shown in this article, as the treatment for mental problems, is no different than it's use to treat the problems, real or otherwise, of drug use. - Richard BY DEFAULT, JAILS BECOME MENTAL INSTITUTIONS In This Article THE JAIL: Faulting System In Los Angeles THE DELINQUENT: Young, Mentally Ill And Bound for Jail THE ASYLUM: Well-Meaning Plan To Close Hospitals LOS ANGELES -- Michael H. had not had a shave or haircut in months when he was found one recent morning sleeping on the floor of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in suburban Lancaster, next to empty cans of tuna and soup from the church pantry. There was little to suggest that he had once been a prosperous college graduate with a wife and two children -- until he developed schizophrenia, lost his job and, without insurance, could no longer afford the drugs needed to control his mental illness. Charged with illegal entry and burglary, Michael H. was taken to the Los Angeles County Jail. The jail, by default, is the nation's largest mental institution. On an average day, it holds 1,500 to 1,700 inmates who are severely mentally ill, most of them detained on minor charges, essentially for being public nuisances. The situation in the jail, scathingly criticized as unconstitutional by the United States Justice Department last fall, is the most visible evidence that jails and prisons have become the nation's new mental hospitals. On any day, almost 200,000 people behind bars -- more than 1 in 10 of the total -- are known to suffer from schizophrenia, manic depression or major depression, the three most severe mental illnesses. The rate is four times that in the general population. And there is evidence, particularly with juveniles, that the numbers in jail are growing. Some of these people have committed serious, violent crimes. But many more are homeless people like Michael H., charged with minor crimes that are byproducts of their illnesses. Others are picked up with no charges at all, in what police call mercy arrests, simply for acting strange. They include adults like Helen Rose Akanni, a woman with paranoid schizophrenia who was mistakenly charged with drunken driving and held for a week before a psychiatrist saw her. They include teen-agers like Jason E., a manic-depressive whose violence gives his father the choice of having him jailed or endangering his family. "Part of mental illness in America now is that you are going to get arrested," said Laurie M. Flynn, executive director of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill, an advocacy group of relatives and friends of people with mental disorders. What experts call the criminalization of the mentally ill has grown as an issue as the nation's inmate population has exploded and as corrections officials and families of the emotionally disturbed have become alarmed by the problems posed by having the mentally ill behind bars. But the trend began in the 1960s, with the mass closings of public mental hospitals. At the time, new antipsychotic drugs made medicating patients in the community seem a humane alternative to long-term hospitalization. States also seized the chance to slash hospital budgets. From a high of 559,000 in 1955, the number of patients in state institutions dropped to 69,000 in 1995. But the drugs work only when they are taken -- and when they work, patients are tempted to stop, because of the unpleasant side effects. As states lagged in opening a promised network of clinics and halfway houses to monitor patients, obtaining treatment became harder. Health insurers restricted coverage, for-profit hospitals turned away the psychotic, and new laws made it more difficult to commit disturbed people. Thousands began to fall through the cracks. Coincidentally, with voters willing to spend freely to fight rising crime rates, states were building more jails and prisons. Jails became the only institutions left open to the mentally ill 24 hours a day. Homelessness was the most public sign of the problem. But for growing numbers of people, the price of mental illness was arrest. Ms. Akanni, for example, became upset when she could not find her 2-year-old daughter; the girl had fallen asleep under a bed. To calm herself, Ms. Akanni went for a drive, but she got in an accident. When she gave her name as the Lord God Almighty, an officer arrested her for drunken driving. A week passed before a psychiatrist saw her and she was able to explain that she had a 2-year-old at home, alone. When Ms. Akanni was released, she was arrested again, for abandoning her child. The girl had survived by eating garbage. "The inmates we see in jail today are the same people I used to see in psychiatric hospitals," said Dr. Eugene Kunzman, the former medical director of the mental health program at the Los Angeles jail. In many states, so many public hospitals have closed, or the laws regulating admission to hospitals have been made so tight, that sometimes the only way to get care is to be arrested. Resources are especially scarce for juveniles. In Dallas, social workers advised Jason E.'s family to have him jailed to get treatment. He had assaulted both parents and his brother, and hospitals were too expensive or refused him because he was violent. Jason's father rejected the advice and kept him at home -- only to be warned he could be charged with endangering his other son. "It's tragic," said Judge Hal Gaither of the Dallas County Juvenile Court. "If you are a young person and mentally ill, you have to get arrested to receive treatment." Though some people do benefit from regular medication while in jail, others suffer as the stress deepens their depression, intensifies delusions or leads to a psychotic break. Suicide is a risk: 95 percent of those who commit suicide in jail or prison have a diagnosed mental disorder, a study in the American Journal of Psychiatry found. Locking up the mentally ill also has high costs for the nation's crowded prisons and jails. Because judges are often reluctant to grant bail to the mentally ill, and because they need special treatment, they tend to stay in jail much longer than other inmates. On Rikers Island, New York City's jail, where 15 percent of new inmates have serious mental disorders, the average stay for all inmates is 42 days, but it is 215 days for the mentally ill, said Dr. Arthur Lynch, the official in the New York City Health and Hospitals Corp. who oversees treatment in the jail. Jails and prisons often find themselves unprepared to deal with the mentally ill. Guards may not know, for example, how to respond to disturbed inmates who simply are not capable of standing in an orderly line for meals; a common result is that the inmates are put in solitary confinement. "We are doing the best we can, but it is definitely frustrating for the officers," said Gayle Ray, the county sheriff for Nashville, where 142 inmates on antipsychotic medication -- 8.6 percent of her jail system's 1,630 inmates -- are housed on one floor of the Criminal Justice Center. "Jails were not designed to be mental hospitals, and what's happening is a real passing of the buck to another part of the system." Advocates for the mentally ill say the clock is being turned back to the 19th century, when it was common in the United States to confine people with mental illness in jails. Mental hospitals, or asylums, grew out of a crusade in the 1840s by Dorothea Dix, the Boston reformer, who warned that "insane persons" were being confined in "cages, closets, cellars, stalls, pens: chained, naked, beaten with rods and lashed into obedience." "Criminalization," said Dr. E. Fuller Torrey, a leading researcher of schizophrenia in Washington, D.C., "has been both a personal disaster for the mentally ill, and an institutional disaster for the criminal justice system." THE JAIL: Faulting System In Los Angeles In Los Angeles, an average of 1,000 new offenders a day are brought to the county jail system, seven separate jails spread across 4,000 square miles housing a total of 22,000 inmates. It is a logistical nightmare. When the Justice Department investigated the jail last year, this was the screening procedure it found: On entering, each prisoner was issued a sheet and towel and was shown an informational video. Among other questions, the video asked new arrivals to tell jailers if they had a mental health problem. Many of the sickest new arrivals did not, because they were in denial. Others did not respond because they had been to the jail before. They knew that if they did, they would be issued yellow jumpsuits, which made them easy targets for guards or other inmates. They might be locked 23 hours a day in dirty isolation cells. And any medication they had would be confiscated until a jail psychiatrist saw them -- which could take weeks. "Unconstitutional conditions exist at the Los Angeles County Jail," the report by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division concluded, "including a deliberate indifference to the inmates' serious mental health needs." The study, prompted by relatives of people who had been jailed, was the first federal review of the predicament of the mentally ill in jail. It produced a case study of the forces that draw the mentally ill into jails, and of the problems that they pose for jails and that jails pose for them. "The problem I see is that the whole concept of treatment of the mentally ill in jail is an oxymoron," said David Myer, who directs the Los Angeles Mental Health Department's programs in the jail. "Jail is a horrible place. It isn't good for people who are well. For someone who is mentally ill, it is terrible." The troubles begin with the fact that the county jail is a jail, not a hospital. It is run by the sheriff's department to keep discipline among its large population and to process inmates for court. In addition, most deputies have little training in dealing with the emotionally disturbed, said Anita Dunsay, a recently retired clinical psychologist who worked in the jail. "The deputies tend to be fresh graduates of the sheriff's academy, and baby-sitting isn't what they joined up for, so they easily get angry at the mentally ill," she said. One result, the Justice Department charged, was that even though l,700 inmates a day got some form of treatment, many more had mental illnesses that were going undetected. This was particularly true of those who were quietly depressed or had personality or anxiety disorders, illnesses for which California law does not mandate care. The report also charged that record-keeping was so haphazard that some mentally ill inmates were lost in the system, while many illnesses were misdiagnosed and patients were given the wrong medication. On a tour of the Central Jail three months after the report's release, mentally ill inmates in yellow jumpsuits could be seen meeting with a psychiatrist on a steel bench in a busy corridor. A stench from the jail's blocked sewer caused people to cover their noses and mouths. Cells reserved for the mentally ill were so crowded that some men had to sleep on the floor. Some babbled; others complained they could not sleep because of rats in their quarters. The physical conditions improved dramatically in January, when the sheriff's department, under threat of a Justice Department lawsuit, moved most of the mentally disturbed inmates to the county's new Twin Towers jail. There, inmates are housed in clean, modern, one- and two-man cells. The screening process was also updated: deputies now directly ask new arrivals if they are on medication. Already the number identifying themselves as mentally ill has increased, and Myer said he expected it would eventually climb by 50 percent. "The moral of the story," Myer said, "is that if you want to get something done you need to bring the power of the federal government in and threaten to take over your jail." But even as the Los Angeles jail moves toward, in effect, creating its own mental hospital, there are still problems inherent in dealing with the mentally ill in any jail. Inmates, said Kunzman, the former medical director, are seldom in jail long enough to stabilize them on the right medication, to offer them adequate therapy or to plan for their care after release. And so far the changes at the Los Angeles County Jail affect mainly physical conditions, not treatment, said Marianne Baptista, an administrator at Step Up on Second, a mental health agency in Santa Monica whose caseworkers often search the jail for missing clients. "On our end, nothing's changed," she said. Her agency's clients still often disappear into the jail after being arrested, without any notification to the clinic. "More often than not, once in jail, their medications are taken away from them or they are given something different, and then their symptoms come out again," she said. "Being in jail may make them more crazy." That cycle can cause long-term physical damage, said Kay Redfield Jamison, a professor of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. "Every relapse you have increases the odds that your brain is being damaged and that you will have another relapse faster, just like with heart attacks," she said. Without the state hospitals, experts say, a revolving door has been created, in which many mentally ill people cycle from clinics to homelessness to jail. In Los Angeles, more than 70 percent of the severely mentall ill homeless have been arrested at least once, according to a report prepared for the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors by Carla Jacobs, a board member of the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill. Many mentally ill people do manage to get treatment and do not end up in jail, of course, especially those with higher incomes. But the magnitude of the problem is suggested by a survey by the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill of families with a seriously mentally ill member; 40 percent of the ill individuals had been arrested. On an average day, said Linda A. Teplin, a professor of psychiatry at Northwestern University Medical School, 9 percent of men and 18.5 percent of women in local jails -- about 56,000 people -- are severely mentally ill. An estimated 10 percent of all inmates in state and federal prisons, , or 122,000 people, are severely mentally ill, said Allen J. Beck of the Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics. And about 20 percent of juveniles in criminal justice facilities, or 20,000 people, are that ill, said Joseph Cocozza, director of the GAINS Center, a research organization in Delmar, N.Y. It was Professor Teplin's research that first demonstrated that the mentally ill are arrested much more often than people in the general population. But the problem, she said, is not police callousness. "The police arrest the mentally ill because they have no other alternative," she said. She recalled riding with the police in a Midwestern city one night when they received a call about a crazy man on a bus. The man, named Charlie, was both schizophrenic and a drunk. They took him to a detoxification center, where he fell asleep. But the detox center recognized him and insisted he was crazy, not drunk, so the police drove him to a hospital. At the hospital the doctors also knew Charlie. Regarding him as difficult, they said he was an alcoholic to avoid admitting him. Finally, the police arrested Charlie, Professor Teplin said. It was a cold night and they did not want him to freeze to death. He was charged with disorderly conduct. THE DELINQUENT: Young, Mentally Ill And Bound for Jail The 16-year-old girl suffered from delusions and hallucinations. The diagnosis was "psychotic, not otherwise specified." Her father was in prison for sexually abusing her sister. Her mother was an alcoholic. Not surprisingly, the girl began skipping school. She got pregnant. She assaulted her mother. Before most state hospitals were closed, the girl would probably have been committed to a state psychiatric hospital. But in Texas, where she lives, the juvenile court declared her a delinquent and sent her to the state's juvenile justice agency, the Texas Youth Commission. The commission sent her to its Corsicana Residential Treatment Center for seriously emotionally disturbed youths. The girl personifies the problems facing many young people with mental disorders, said Linda Reyes, a psychologist and assistant deputy executive director of the TYC. "Unless you are wealthy and can afford private doctors, you have to get arrested to get treatment," she said. Even so, the commission is limited in what it can do. The girl refuses to take antipsychotic medication, and because Corsicana is not a hospital, its staff cannot make her take it. She is not making progress -- she walks around naked and urinates on the floor -- but by law, when her term expires, she must be released. Incarcerating mentally ill adolescents is "tragic and absurd," Dr. Reyes said. "The system we have created is totally ineffective. It doesn't rehabilitate the kids. And it doesn't even take care of public safety, because when she is sent home, she will just get picked up again." Of the 4,791 juveniles in the Texas agency's custody, 22 percent suffer from schizophrenia, manic depression or major depression. The national figure is similar: an estimated 20 percent of incarcerated juveniles are seriously emotionally disturbed. When other psychiatric disorders are included, the percentages rise sharply. A recent survey by the California Youth Authority found that 35 percent of boys in its custody and 73 percent of girls need treatment, said its director, Francisco Alarcon. One reason for the higher percentage of young people with mental illness in jail, specialists say, is that many states have cut budgets for adolescent psychiatric hospitals even more than those for adults. "I had a 15-year-old girl who was hallucinating and psychotic," said Cathy Brock, a supervisor at the Letot Center in Dallas for runaway children. "And a staff member from Mental Health and Mental Retardation agreed she needed hospitalization. But then she said they were over budget for the year -- so couldn't I find an offense that would get her arrested, like an assault?" The Dallas County Juvenile Department has as large a budget for psychiatric hospitalization, $6.6 million this year, as the county's mental health department. As a result, Ms. Brock said, "When I have a kid who is severely mentally ill and has been arrested, and the family has no resources, I will do everything I can to make sure that kid gets adjudicated." But urging judges and families to convict children, she said, "presents all kinds of ethical binds.". Another reason these young people are incarcerated disproportionately is that they act out their illnesses more than adults, usually in aggressive and impulsive ways that can get them arrested, said the president of the National Mental Health Association, Michael Faenza. There is evidence that the number of disturbed young people being arrested is increasing. At Corsicana, Dr. Reyes said, the proportion of juveniles on antipsychotic drugs has doubled to 80 percent since 1990. But it is unclear whether this trend indicates more mental illness, or reflects tougher sentencing laws that are driving greater numbers of all young people behind bars. Torrey, the schizophrenia expert, said he does not believe that social conditions, like the breakdown of the family and bad parenting, cause young people to become mentally ill. "What we are seeing," he said, "is the breakdown of the public mental health system." THE ASYLUM: Well-Meaning Plan To Close Hospitals For a growing number of the mentally ill, it has come to this, said Dr. Michael Pawel, executive director of the August Aichhorn Center for emotionally disturbed juvenile offenders in Manhattan: "Jail has become the place where, when you have to go there, they have to take you in." As thousands of the mentally ill end up behind bars, no one has estimated the cost of shifting so many of the mentally ill from one kind of institution, hospitals, to another, jails and prisons. At New York state's rate of $30,000 a year per inmate, the annual cost to prisons alone would be $3.7 billion, not counting the extra expenses of treating the mentally ill. But because of the price exacted on the mentally ill themselves, some therapists and mental health advocates are reconsidering what they did in helping to close state hospitals. "I was not wrong that antipsychotic medications were good," said Dr. Richard Lamb, a professor of psychiatry at the University of Southern California School of Medicine. Lamb worked in a state hospital in the 1960s and was among those pushing for treating people outside hospitals. "But I was wrong about discharging so many people with severe problems." Part of the premise, he recalled, was that governments would build places in communities where discharged patients could continue to take their drugs and get therapy. But, largely for economic reasons, this was never done. Now, Lamb said he realizes, "Some people just need more structured care." Thinking over what seemed at the time like a wonderful reform, he likened himself to the British colonel in "The Bridge Over the River Kwai." The colonel built a bridge for his Japanese captors because the idea was so magnificent. "What have I done?" he asked himself. Copyright 1998 The New York Times Company
------------------------------------------------------------------- A Boulevard Leads To Drugs And Death (Op-Ed In 'New York Times' Notes Open Air Drug Dealers Are Still Hanging Out In Newark, New Jersey, Waiting For Suburban 'Junkies' In Cars - Prohibitionists Can't Abrogate Laws Of Supply And Demand But Won't Even Consider Regulatory Reforms That Would Eliminate Neighbors' Problems) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 22:06:40 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US NJ: NYT: Commentary: A Boulevard Leads to Drugs and Death Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: "Dick Evans" Pubdate: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 Source: New York Times (NY) Author: Evelyn Nieves Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ COMMENTARY: A BOULEVARD LEADS TO DRUGS AND DEATH NEWARK, N.J. -- After all that's happened, the petty drug dealers are still hanging out on West Runyon Street and Irvine Turner Boulevard, waiting for the suburban junkies. On Wednesday afternoon, two stood in front of the deli across from the Belmont-Runyon Elementary School as children played double Dutch and tag behind a 6-foot chain link fence. Two more, in identical Green Bay Packers jackets, stationed themselves halfway down the block. They were leaning against a "No Loitering: Violators will be Prosecuted" sign in the window of Rodriguez Supermarket. When a police car passed, they didn't bother to pretend not to notice. They looked at the cruiser and cracked up, doubling over and covering their mouths with their hands. Everything was supposed to change after last March, when 8-year-old Terrell James was hit by a speeding car as he crossed Irvine Turner Boulevard on his way to Belmont-Runyon's playground. The accident focused attention on several longstanding problems. The hit-and-run driver, Daniel Tonkovich, 18, was one of the neighborhood's many unwelcome out-of-towners. He had come to Newark from the shore town of Toms River, for the same reason as so many other visitors -- to buy drugs. Then, like the others, he was zooming home, yards away from the Interstate 78 access ramp, when he ran into Terrell. Citizens, who had complained for years that the school was practically on the Route 78 ramp, demanded that the school be relocated, that the ramp be widened, that the drug dealers be swept off the streets. Officials agreed. The state Department of Transportation allocated $10 million toward a new school building and a study of plans for a wider ramp. The Newark police set up roadblocks to trip up speeding drivers and stepped up drug sweeps. Meanwhile, Tonkovich, according to his family, became a changed man. Jolted by Terrell's death, he swore to come clean. He entered a rehabilitation program and wrote a pamphlet on teen-age drug use full of passages like this one: "Never in my strangest nightmares did I ever think this would happen to my family or myself. It's a very hard thing to deal with, knowing that an 8-year-old child lost his life because of me. If I am convicted of all the charges brought against me I could spend a very long time in prison. Don't think that it can't happen again. It can and it will." Those last words sound almost prophetic. Despite all the promises and plans, it seems as if Terrell's death has changed very little. E.J. Miranda, a spokesman for the Newark schools, said that plans to relocate the Belmont-Runyon School are proceeding. This week, a committee of city, school and community leaders is to look at architects' proposals for a building scheduled to open in September 1999. Meanwhile, the school is still open. The children still play in the yard. The cars still plow through Irvine Turner Boulevard -- on Wednesday, the average speed seemed to be about 20 miles greater than the 30 mile-per-hour limit -- on their way to the Route 78 ramp. And, of course, the drug dealers still wait for their customers, who must still be buying. Otherwise, there would be no reason for the sellers to risk the police heat and the neighborhood's boiling resentment. On Wednesday, the two dealers at the corner of Irvine Turner Boulevard and West Runyon Street made no secret of their purpose. It was about 55 degrees, but they were wearing bulky down coats (the better to stash their goods) and wool ski caps (to obscure their looks). They smiled broadly and gave two thumbs up to a reporter circling the block, maybe thinking this was a potential customer. Residents interviewed said there are not as many street-level dealers as there used to be. But no one wanted to be quoted about the situation. "Now is not the time to be talking," said an elderly woman who didn't want her name printed. "At first, everyone was so shocked by the little boy's death. Now, things are almost like they used to be. The drugs -- they're winning." Heroin certainly beat Tonkovich to the finish. On Sunday afternoon, just two weeks before he was to stand trial for aggravated manslaughter in Terrell's death, he was found dead of an overdose in his parents' home, a needle by his side. He had been battling the addiction, but his family and friends still could not believe the drugs won. Not when he had been working out a plea deal with prosecutors, and he and his girlfriend were expecting their first child.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 'New York Review Of Books' March 5 (List Subscriber Gives URL For Magazine, Recommends Keeping Eye Out For Review Of Three Books On Blacks In The Criminal Justice System, Including 'Search And Destroy - African-American Males In The Criminal Justice System,' By Jerome Miller) Subj: NY Review of Books March 5 From: Peter Webster
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 1998 14:55:00 +0000 In the NY Review of Books March 5 there is a review of three books on Blacks in the Criminal Justice System that should be read by activists, one of the books reviewed is Jerome Miller's important *Search and Destroy: African-American Males in the Criminal Justice System*. The review is titled "Justice for Blacks?" by Nicholas Lemann, unfortunately it is not yet available at the website of the NYRev but probably will be in weeks to come when the new issue is online. The NYRev website is excellent, btw, and has online most articles and reviews back to '94 with plans to put the entire archives online in the future. The URL is http://www.nybooks.com/nyrev/ Peter Webster email: email@example.com
------------------------------------------------------------------- Mexico Drug Certification Eyed ('Associated Press' Says Two Republicans In US House Of Representatives, Clay Shaw And John Mica, Both Of Florida, Have Introduced Bill To Reverse Clinton Administration's Certification Of Mexico As An Ally In War On Some Drugs) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 22:10:16 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: US: Mexico Drug Certification Eyed Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Newshawk: Kevin Zeese Source: Associate Press Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 MEXICO DRUG CERTIFICATION EYED WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Clinton made a mistake in certifying Mexico as a fully cooperative ally in the war against illegal drug trafficking, two House Republicans say. Now Reps. Clay Shaw and John Mica, both of Florida, have introduced a bill to reverse that decision. ``For the president to call Mexico a 'partner' in the war on drugs is outrageous,'' Shaw said Wednesday. ``A significant amount of the drugs on our streets and in our neighborhoods continues to come from Mexico. We must take this step to show the Mexican government that we take anti-drug efforts with dead seriousness.'' The bill was announced a day after Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Sen. Paul Coverdell, R-Ga., introduced a similar bill in the Senate. ``While Mexico has made some limited progress, there remain gaping holes in its counternarcotics effort,'' Feinstein said Tuesday. The annual certification process regularly offends officials in Mexico, who call it an insult that infringes on their sovereignty. The president must decide each year by March 1 whether to certify Mexico and other nations as cooperating partners in efforts to stop the production or shipment of cocaine, heroin, marijuana and other drugs from their countries. Foreign governments that are not certified face the loss of U.S. aid. Congress has 30 days to decide whether to reverse the president's decision. Both bills would allow the president to waive sanctions against Mexico despite decertification, however. A spokesman for the White House's Office of National Drug Control Policy said the bills are likely to fail -- as they have previously. The United States stands to gain more through continued cooperation, said spokesman Bob Weiner.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Student Loans Safe (Letter To Editor Of 'Calgary Herald' Rebuts Cop's Assertion That A Conviction For A Drug Offense Prevents Young People From Getting A Student Loan In Alberta) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 18:36:17 -0700 Subject: LTE - Calgary Herald From: "Debbie Harper3"
To: mattalk LTE: Calgary Herald http://www.southam.com/calgaryherald/ PUB: March 5, 1998 Student loans safe Re: "Police not turning other cheek to dope," Calgary Herald, Feb. 28. Staff Sgt. Gord Banack says that a conviction for a drug offense might prevent young people from getting a student loan in Alberta. When I read this, I was shocked, since it seems to me that not only is this discriminatory but potentially infringes on an applicantıs Charter rights. So I asked a few questions and did some checking at the Alberta Students Finance web page and asked some Alberta students if this was the case. Banack is incorrect. As I suspected, the presence of a criminal record has no bearing on a student loan application in Alberta. Chalk another one up to "reefer madness". Itıs no wonder kids today donıt take anti-drug campaigns seriously when theyıre given misleading and false information like this. Timothy J. Meehan Toronto, Ont.
------------------------------------------------------------------- On Contrasting Marijuana With Tobacco And Alcohol (Op-Ed In Toronto 'Globe And Mail' By One Of Three Scientists Who Wrote WHO Paper Reportedly Suppressed By US NIDA Stands By Its Conclusion Cannabis Is Safest, But Says Report Wasn't Suppressed And Pot Is Harmful - Based On Speculative 'Suspected' Effects And One Explicit Assertion Cannabis Addictive - This Is Science?) From: firstname.lastname@example.org Date: Thu, 05 Mar 98 21:07:50 EST To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, #TLC__CANNABIS_at_osiemail@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com Subject: WHO report: On contrasting marijuana with tobacco and alcohol Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Thursday, March 05, 1998 Source: Globe and Mail, Page A19 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/ On contrasting marijuana with tobacco and alcohol By Robin Room The recent "flap" about our comparative report on the health risks of marijuana (Marijuana Flap Gets Pot Boiling at WHO -- March 3) is more interesting for what is left unsaid in the media than for what happened about its publication. Three of us -- one researcher in Australia, two in Canada -- were asked by an Expert Working Group of the World Health Organization (WHO) to prepare a report comparing the health and psychological consequences of marijuana, alcohol, tobacco and opiates, on the basis of existing research. This was one of 16 commissioned review papers in WHO's first review of marijuana and health since 1982. By arrangement with WHO, the whole series of papers, updated by their authors, will be published later this year as an Addiction Research Foundation book by the Addiction and Mental Health Services Corporation of Toronto. Drawing on papers, WHO published a summary report late last year. The flap has been about this report, since it dropped the comparisons wih other drugs, arguing "the reliability and public health significance of such comparisons are doubtful." However, the report acknowledged the existence of our comparison paper, and WHO staff have sent copies of it on request. It would therefore not be accurate to say our paper has been suppressed. What about the claim that comparisons are unreliable or unscientific? This is very much a matter of judgement. Everyone would agree that more research, particularly on the epidemiology of harms from marijuana, is needed. But in my view enough is known for such comparisons to be useful. Indeed, both the public and the public policy process deserve from scientists our best efforts and advice on important issues of public health and policy. Two big things are left unsaid in the flap. One is that marijuana does cause harm to health. Our paper has a long catalogue of these harms. In the debates over marijuana's legal status, these harms should not be denied. The second is that marijuana appears relatively less harmful only because of the severe and wide-ranging health and social harms from alcohol and from tobacco. Even gross comparisons are illuminating on this. The accompanying table lists the main adverse health effects of the three drugs, with a rough distinction between effects that are important in terms of numbers affected and effects that are less well-established or less important numerically. In some respects, the table is a matter of judgement. And it does not consider potential beneficial effects of each drug. But it makes that point thjat there are important harms from both alcohol and tobacco that do not exist for marijuana. Comparing Adverse Effects on Health xx Important effect x Some effect known or suspected Marijuana Alcohol Tobacco Traffic and xx other accidents Violence xx and suicide Overdose x Death Liver cirrhosis x Heart disease x xx Respiratory x xx diseases Cancers x x xx Mental illness x x Addiction xx xx xx Lasting effects x xx x on fetus In a society like ours, where commerce in alcohol and tobacco is deeply entrenched, where leading sports and cultural institutions depend on alcohol or tobacco sponsorship, and where media draw considerable revenue from alcohol and tobacco advertisements, we tend to look away from the health and social harms of alcohol and tobacco. Our worries about illicit drugs sometimes seems like a convenient distraction. But it is alcohol and tobacco that are the main sources of drug harm in Canada today, as the cost-of-illness comparisons of the Canadian Center on Substance Abuse showed: $7.5-billion in 1992 for alcohol, $9.5-billion for tobacco, and $1.4-billion for all illicit drugs together. Sociologist Robin Room is Chief Scientist at the Addiction Research Foundation division of the Addiction and Mental Health Services Corporation of Toronto.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Re - Weed Is Healthier Than Alcohol Or Tobacco (Letter To Editor Of 'Now' Magazine In Canada By Medical Marijuana Activist And Multiple Sclerosis Patient Lynn Harichy Says Suppressed WHO Report Only Documents What Is Common Knowledge To Anyone Who Has Studied The Marijuana Issue) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 11:49:30 -0500 From: Carey Ker
Subject: PUB: Pot laws cost lots but solve nothing To: email@example.com Priority: Normal Delivery-Receipt-To: Carey Ker Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org Source: NOW, March 05, 1998, Page 14 Contact: email@example.com Re: Weed Is Healthier Than Alcohol Or Tobacco (NOW, February 26 - March 4) This is common knowledge to anyone who has studied the marijuana issue. The facts are out there and have been for along time. Why are we still wasting hard to come by "tax dollars" on this issue? Why are families still being torn up because of this issue? I am not a criminal! I don't deserve to go to jail! I am tired of taking drugs that are prescribed to me that cause me more harm than good. I shouldn't have to apologize for my informed decision to use cannabis sativa for medicine. I want to be in control of my health. I am going to Court in April. I will also be opening a marijuana buyer's club were people can come and purchase this herb and get information. I don't want to break another law but feel until this issue is dealt with others like me will have to go somewhere to get it. Lynn Harichy
------------------------------------------------------------------- Re - Marijuana Flap Gets Pot Boiling At WHO (Letter To Editor Of Toronto's 'Globe And Mail' Says WHO And Its Sister UN Organization, The International Narcotics Control Board, Appear To Have No Interest In Engaging In A Balanced Debate About Cannabis) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 12:00:31 -0500 From: Carey Ker
Subject: PUB: Cannabis Tizzy To: firstname.lastname@example.org Priority: Normal Delivery-Receipt-To: Carey Ker Newshawk: email@example.com Pubdate: Thursday, March 05, 1998 Source: Globe and Mail, Page A18 Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.globeandmail.ca/ Re: Marijuana flap gets pot boiling at WHO (March 3) It is understandable that the World Health Organization is in a tizzy at the suggestion that it suppressed a report showing cannabis comparing more favorably than legal drugs such as nicotine and alcohol. WHO and its sister International Narcotics Control Board appear to have no interest in engaging in a balanced debate about cannabis. The INCB's 1997 annual report states that public incitement by the media to consume illicit drugs, can arise from showing "illicit use in a favourable light." It declares that Governments need to assess whether "freedom of expression cannot remain unrestricted when it conflicts with other essential values and rights." It seems that the INCB and WHO regard favorable reportage about illicit drugs as public incitement to consume them. One wonders what kind of media blitz the WHO would have engaged in had cannabis been found to be more harmful than alcohol. Carey Ker, Toronto
------------------------------------------------------------------- 1998 Global Days Against The Drug War! June 6, 7, 8 (International Demonstration Includes Public Rallies And Related Events In New York, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Tel Aviv, Dallas, Stockholm, Brussels, Colville, Tallinn, Eugene, Texoma, London, Bonn, Sidney, Wellington, Paris, Ilmenau, Washington) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 09:29:48 EST Reply-To: email@example.com Originator: firstname.lastname@example.org Sender: email@example.com From: Harry Bego (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: Multiple recipients of list
Subject: UPDATE: The Days against the Drug War: 20 events! *** PLEASE DISTRIBUTE BY EMAIL AND FAX *** The 1998 Global Days against the Drug War! June 6, 7, 8 Events in New York, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Tel Aviv, Dallas, Stockholm, Brussels, Colville, Tallinn, Eugene, Texoma, London, Bonn, Sidney, Wellington, Paris, Ilmenau, Washington, ... Join the Coalition! As you probably know, the United Nations will hold the first-ever Special Session of the General Assembly on Drugs, from June 8th to June 10th 1998 in New York. This session was originally conceived as a critical examination of worldwide anti-drug policy. The focus of this session has now been narrowed. According to the new guidelines, only the expansion of existing policies will be open for discussion. The United Nations aims to escalate current drug repression tactics in a catastrophic quest towards a 'drug free' society. In terms of crime, economic and financial damage, and social and personal harm, this policy is turning into a worldwide crisis! It is of great importance that alternative proposals are heard at the onset of this UN session. A clear statement must be made that what is needed is not escalated repression, but reform policies aimed at reducing the damage currently done. To this aim, a number of organisations have recently united to form the "Global Coalition for Alternatives to the Drug War". They have written a declaration that will be published widely. You can join the coalition by co-signing the declaration; see the contact info below. Members of this coalition are also invited to participate in the "1998 Global Days against the Drug War", which are held Saturday June 6th, Sunday June 7th, and Monday June 8th. This international event will feature discussion forums, seminars, publications, press conferences, demonstrations, street parties, concerts, and other types of events, in many places at the same time. At this moment (March 4th), 20 events are being planned! A 'grand finale' is planned to take place in New York on Monday 8th. You can help make the 1998 Global Days against the Drug War a success! Make sure your city is part of this event. If you are a member of a group or organisation that can help, contact us. Otherwise, you can join one or more of the participating groups and organisations, or set up your own group. See the contact info below. Early spring of 1998 we will issue press releases with the names of all the groups and organisations that have joined the coalition. Groups and organisations are invited to plan their own version of the 1998 Global Days against the Drug War, under their own identity and name. Note however that participation in the coali- tion does not itself imply endorsement of the individual events taking place. Organisations wishing to join the coalition can send mail to email@example.com. Individual activists please visit the web site at http://www.legalize.org. The Global Coalition for Alternatives to the Drug War currently consists of: The Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet), the National Organi- sation for Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Coordinamento Radicale Antiprohibizionista (CORA), the November Coalition, the Campaign for Equity-Restorative Justice (CERJ), the Transnational Radical Party (TRP), Common Sense for Drug Policy, the Legalize! Initiative, the Media Awareness Project (MAP), American Society for Action on Pain (ASAP), Compassionate Care Alliance, the Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp (CRRH), HANF! Magazine, and more than 20 other organisations. Participate in the Global Days against the Drug War ! June 6, 7, 8 http://www.legalize.org. e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org *** PLEASE DISTRIBUTE BY EMAIL AND FAX *** Subject: LEGALIZE! UPDATE: The Global Coalition & the Global Days ! News Update of the Legalize! Initiative March 5, 1998 For latest info, visit our web site www.legalize.org or send mail to email@example.com. You can contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org. *** Dear drug policy reformer! This is the next in a series of updates to keep you informed about the planning of the 1998 Global Days against the Drug War, which will be held on Saturday June 6th, Sunday June 7th, and Monday June 8th, at the start of the UN General Assembly Special Session on Drugs (UNGASS), which takes place in New York, June 8th, 9th and 10th. For more information see http://www.legalize.org. CONTENTS 1. 20 EVENTS PLANNED SO FAR! Some information about the coming June events. 2. THE COALITION: OVER 30 MEMBER ORGANISATIONS Many organisations have recently joined! 3. THE DECLARATION Organisations can join the coalition by signing it. 4. AGAIN: THE CALL FOR PARTICIPATION Send it out to promote the Global Days! *** 1. 20 EVENTS PLANNED SO FAR! In the previous news update (issued Feb 11th) we reported about events in New York, San Francisco, Amsterdam, Tel Aviv, Dallas, Stockholm, Brussels, Colville (Wa), Tallinn (Estonia), Eugene (Or) and Texoma (Okla). In the mean time, we have received information about events being planned in several other places, a.o. Bonn, London, Paris, Washington, the four main New Zealand cities, Ilmenau (Germany), and Sidney (Australia). Some of these are still in the first planning stages. The following information was supplied by Jenetzky, HANF! chief editor: Bonn, Monday, June 8th: "1.000 Argumente" HANF! Magazine organises a mail campaign. Our readers write letters with arguments to our gouvernment, and we will take them to Kohl's. The campaign will be called "1.000 Argumente", starts with the April issue and will bring a lot of mail to the federal gouvernment, altogether supplied to Bonn on Monday, June 8th. Information: J. Jenetzky, email@example.com. Julia Carter, coordinator of Legalize! California, wrote: A significant Drug Peace Rally is currently being planned for San Francisco during the Global Days against the Drug War. It is tentatively scheduled for the afternoon of Saturday, June 6th and the Civic Center Plaza has been reserved for the occasion. Ideas and offers of volunteer help for this important event are warmly encouraged! Julia Legalize! Initiative CA and Drug Peace Rally Coordinator Voice Mail (415) 971-3573 firstname.lastname@example.org This came in two days ago, from Susan McGuckin of Sidney, Australia: The New South Wales Users & AIDS Association, a drug users group based in Sydney, is considering an event. Susan McGuckin, Information Officer, NUAA, PO Box 822, Sidney, Australia. Phone: #61-2-93693455 e-mail: email@example.com The plans for a London event are in the conceptual phase ...; anyone who's interested in organisation, contact Transform director Danny Kushlick at firstname.lastname@example.org or on 0117 939 8052. A meeting is scheduled for March 23d. For information about these and other events, see our web pages. Of course we encourage you to consider planning similar events! Events do not necessarly have to be big - a small rally, an anti-prohibition party, a forum discussion, it is up to you what form and size your participation will take ... Contact fellow anti-prohibitionists, local drug reform organisations, clubs, etc., get together and see what you can do. And inform us, of course! 2. THE GLOBAL COALITION FOR ALTERNATIVES TO THE DRUG WAR! As you know, we are setting up a coalition of reform organisations, which will issue declarations, and the members of which will support the Global Days against the Drug War. The coalition currently consists of over 30 organisations: Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet), National Organisation for Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), Transnational Radical Party (TRP), November Coalition, Coordinamento Radicale Antiproibizionista (CORA), Media Awareness Project (MAP), Campaign for the Restoration and Regulation of Hemp (CRRH), Common Sense for Drug Policy (CSDP), Transform, Campaign for Equity-Restorative Justice (CERJ), "Kne Bossem", the NPO for Changing Israeli Drug Laws, the American Society for Action on Pain (ASAP), The Dutch Drug Policy Foundation, Compassionate Care Alliance, Swedish Cannabis Association (SCA), The Association for Emancipatory Drug Policy (DEBED), Auto Support des Usagers de Drogues (ASUD), Orange County Hemp Council (OCHC), The Legalize! Initiative, Instituto de Documentaci Investigaci del Cannabis (IDIC), Green Prisoners Release, Kansas State Lobbyists for Cannabis Law Reform, Oregonians for Personal Privacy (OPP), Drug Users Rights Forum (DURF), Drug Policy Reform Group of St. Paul, Legalise Cannabis!, the Recreational Drugs Committee, New South Wales Users & AIDS Association, HANF! Magazine, El Cogollo, Revista Cann1bica, HighLife, HempWorld. See http://www.legalize.org/events/ for information about these organisations. To make your organisation join the coalition write to: email@example.com. 3. THE DECLARATION Organisations can join the coalition by signing the following declaration: *** The Global Coalition for Alternatives to the Drug War Declaration We, the undersigned, having recognized the extraordinary damage being caused by the Drug War, join together in a call for wide-ranging and honest international and intranational discussion about the effectiveness and consequences of current, force-based drug policies. Furthermore, we call upon our governments and fellow citizens to begin the process of the exploration of alternative solutions to the issues that these policies are claimed to address. This process should include, but not be limited to, a revision of the United Nations conventions and other international treaties which inhibit nations from adopting such alternatives. We believe that in an atmosphere of honest and rational examination, effective policies can be found which are based not upon force, repression, prohibition, coercive government action and the use of violence, but upon the universal principles of human rights, freedom, justice, equality under the law, the dignity of the individual, the health of people and communities, and the sovereignty of nations. It should be noted that this coalition represents a very broad range of political and social viewpoints, and a wide variety of issue-interests. The heterogeneity of the signatories to this coalition is evidence of both the intellectual strength of our position and the breadth of the destruction being wrought by current policies. For despite our differences, we stand together in the knowledge that a policy which mandates a continuous state of war, in the absence of a true acknowledgement and assessment of the consequences and excesses of that war, is objectively flawed. And that such a policy is in direct contradiction to the mission and the ideals of the United Nations, and of the peoples of the earth. No society, whether local or global, can long endure under a perpetual state of war. Nor do we choose to leave as a legacy to our children, and to future generations, the disastrous results of such a policy. It is time to find alternatives. The Global Coalition for Alternatives to the Drug War. *** 4. AGAIN: THE CALL FOR PARTICIPATION Send out this updated version to promote the Global Days! *** PLEASE DISTRIBUTE BY EMAIL AND FAX
------------------------------------------------------------------- Majority Of Young Have Taken Drugs ('Irish Independent' Notes Survey Carried Out For National Youth Council Of Ireland Found Just Over Half Had Tried Illegal Drugs, And 45 Percent Said Some Drugs Should Be Legalised, Especially Cannabis) Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 21:12:26 -0500 To: DrugSense News Service
From: Richard Lake Subject: MN: Ireland: Majority Of Young Have Taken Drugs Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Zosimos Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: The Irish Independent Contact: email@example.com MAJORITY OF YOUNG HAVE TAKEN DRUGS CURIOSITY and the influence of friends are the main reasons why just over half of our young people have tried illegal drugs. Only one in eight mentioned boredom as the reason for trying drugs when questioned in a survey carried out for the National Youth Council of Ireland (NYCI). Nearly half (45pc) said some drugs especially cannabis should be legalised but 43pc disagreed while 12pc didn't know. Seven out of 10 believed the Government was not adequately tackling the drugs problem and only 7pc thought it was. Education and prevention should get greater priority. Other key findings from the survey of 1,400 young people: * Unemployment was the key concern. * A quarter of 15 to 24-year-olds were in part-time work. * 40pc said spirituality was not important in their lives. * 89pc are or had been a member of a youth organisation. * 39pc said the education system was not suited to the labour market. NYCI president Jillian Hassett said the survey was the most detailed and comprehensive on Ireland's youth to date. It should help organisations and institutions that dealt with young people, she added. VOTER APATHY "The most important influence on young people today is their own friends. It is the first place young people would turn to in a crisis, for advice on sexual matters and it is the top influence on young people's body image, coming ahead of fashion and the media," Ms Hassett said. If an election were held tomorrow 79pc of registered voters said they would vote while the remainder said they would not. The NYCI said the fact that over a fifth of young voters were so apathetic about the electoral system at such an early age was worrying. The most popular political group was Fianna Fail (23pc), followed by Fine Gael (13pc), Labour (12pc), Green Party (10 pc), PDs (5pc), Democratic Left and Sinn Fein (both 3pc) and others (2pc). Don't knows accounted for 29pc of the total sample of 1,400 young people, North and South. Fine Gael and the Green Party were more popular with young men than young women. Labour and the PDs are more popular with young women. Denis Naughton, Fine Gael spokesperson on youth affairs, said the survey had clearly shown the Government's inability to tackle the growing drug problem in both urban and rural Ireland. "It is obvious that the increased seizure of illegal drugs by the gardai is failing to combat the problem and that increased resources must concentrate on education and preventative measures to reduce the demand for illegal substances," he said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Young People Concerned About Jobs And Drugs (Lengthier 'Irish Times' Account Of Survey Commissioned By National Youth Council Of Ireland Says 'Over Half Of Those Questioned Said They Have Taken Illegal Drugs' - 'Drugs' Number One Concern Of 23 Percent, Compared To 46 Percent Who Think It's Jobs) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:13:13 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: Ireland: Young People Concerned About Jobs And Drugs Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Zosimos Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: Irish Times (Ireland) Author: Christine Newman Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Mail: 11-15 D'Olier St, Dublin 2, Ireland Fax: ++ 353 1 671 9407 YOUNG PEOPLE CONCERNED ABOUT JOBS AND DRUGS Unemployment is the number one concern of Ireland's youth, a comprehensive new survey shows. Over half of those questioned said they have taken illegal drugs. The young people expressed dissatisfaction with the Government for failing to tackle the drugs problem adequately. Fianna Fail is the most popular political party. They are tolerant in their attitude towards refugees or asylum-seekers, who they believe should be allowed to stay in the country. And they consider travellers are the group most discriminated against in Irish society. Their top television programmes are Friends, ER and The Simpsons. Their favourite newspaper is The Irish Times followed by the Irish Independent and the Sun. The survey was commissioned by the National Youth Council of Ireland and carried out in January 1998 by a market research company among 1,400 people between the ages of 15 and 24, North and South. The respondents were stopped at random in the street at 64 centres and asked a series of 48 questions. The president of the NYCI, Ms Jillian Hassett, said at a press conference that it was the most detailed and comprehensive survey ever undertaken among young people. "The Government and those in power need to look at these facts and ensure that they are taken into account in all policies in all areas," she said. The results show that more than one third - 39 per cent - are dissatisfied with the education system although 61 per cent think "their education/training is suited to the present demands of the labour market." In spite of the Celtic Tiger, unemployment is the number one concern, at 46 per cent, ahead of drugs, 23 per cent; Northern Ireland, 11 per cent; crime, 12 per cent and environment, 4 per cent. Twenty four per cent were in part-time employment. On drugs, 69 per cent believe that the Government is not tackling the problem adequately, and consider education and prevention are the best approach. Of those who have taken drugs, 32 per cent said they never use them any more, 12 per cent use them once or more a week, 22 percent take them once or twice a month and 34 per cent three or four times a year. There is an urban-rural divide on the issue of legalisation. Urban young people marginally favour drugs legalisation: 47 per cent say yes, 41 per cent no. Rural young people are marginally against by 46 per cent to 41 per cent. Of those in favour of legalisation, 97 per cent said cannabis should be legalised. While 60 per cent expressed the view that spirituality is important in their lives, only 30 per cent participate regularly in organised religion, and 43 per cent sometimes. Fianna Fail was the most popular political party, at 23 per cent. Seventy nine per cent said they would vote if an election were held in the morning. "This is in contrast to the numbers who actually vote, making a case to have elections held during weekends when young people can actually vote," the NYCI commented. Eighty nine per cent are or have been members of a youth organisation, sports club or voluntary association. A big difference between the attitudes of males and females is on equality. Of the young women, 68 per cent believe that equality of opportunity between men and women does not exist, whereas 52 per cent of young men believe that there is equality of opportunity. Eighty three per cent said they are very satisfied with their body image. The most popular art forms are music, video, cinema and reading novels.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Ballymun Anti-Drugs Activists Praised ('Irish Times' Says Members Of 18 Drugs Block Watches In North Dublin Who Have Set Up Watches To Prevent Illegal-Drug Dealing Were Presented With Commendation Certificates Yesterday By Garda) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:29:33 -0800 To: email@example.com From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: Ireland: Ballymun Anti-Drugs Activists Praised Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Newshawk: Zosimos Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: Irish Times (Ireland) Author: Catherine Cleary Contact: email@example.com Mail: 11-15 D'Olier St, Dublin 2, Ireland Fax: ++ 353 1 671 9407 BALLYMUN ANTI-DRUGS ACTIVISTS PRAISED Drugs with a value of around £500,000 have been seized in the Ballymun area of north Dublin in the last 18 months. The seizures are the result of an increased Garda presence and better co-operation with communities, according to Chief Supt James Murphy of Santry Garda station. The total includes one large seizure of cannabis worth around £200,000. Members of 18 drugs block watches, groups of people who have set up watches to prevent drug dealing in the Ballymun blocks, were presented with certificates yesterday. Chief Supt Murphy told the group, "You the people have been there day and night patrolling the area. We ourselves cannot do the work without your involvement." Ms Marie Cooper from the Shangan Road community council read a letter from an addict thanking the drugs watch workers for getting her off drugs. "She says she doesn't know where she would be today if I hadn't interfered." Ms Cooper said there had been more than 1,000 people involved in marches when the community started to act on the drug problem. Ms Marcella Givens, also from the community council, said people in the area had "lost faith" before the marches began because drug dealers were not being evicted.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Dublin Traders Settle Action Against Drug Centre ('Irish Times' Notes Mixed Success Of Dublin Neighborhood Merchants' Attempt To Reduce Friction With Clients Of Local Drug Treatment Center) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 1998 00:29:33 -0800 To: firstname.lastname@example.org From: Olafur Brentmar
Subject: MN: Ireland: Dublin Traders Settle Action Against Drug Centre Sender: email@example.com Newshawk: Zosimos Pubdate: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 Source: Irish Times (Ireland) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Mail: 11-15 D'Olier St, Dublin 2, Ireland Fax: ++ 353 1 671 9407DUBLIN TRADERS SETTLE ACTION AGAINST DRUG CENTRE Traders in Pearse Street, Dublin, who had claimed their businesses were being affected by the presence of a drug treatment centre on the street, have settled a legal action against the Drug Treatment Centre Board. In the High Court yesterday, Mr John Hedigan SC, for the traders, told Mr Justice Shanley the action against the board and the Minister for Health had been settled "without admission of liability". The board had agreed to pay the traders' legal costs. It is understood the Drug Centre will undertake a number of measures to reduce any loitering on the street by addicts receiving treatment at the centre. At an earlier hearing, traders claimed there had been plans to increase the centre's activities and to open it on a 24-hour basis. The number of addicts attending the centre last year was 1,790 and there were over 51,000 visits. Last November, Mr Justice McCracken said addict numbers should not expand beyond the July, 1997, numbers until after the hearing of the traders' action. The court had been told of complaints from traders of harassment, theft, violence and about the use of syringes.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Police Arrest Drug-Smuggling Mules ('Reuters' Says Greek Police Have Arrested 12 Trained Mules Carrying About Two Tonnes Of Cannabis Near The Border With Albania) Resent-Date: Thu, 5 Mar 1998 17:47:17 -0800 (PST) Old-Return-Path:
Date: Thu, 05 Mar 1998 18:49:25 -0700 Subject: Mules arrested From: "Debbie Harper3" To: mattalk Newshawk: Deb Harper Source: Calgary Herald March 5, 1998 ( A6 ) http://www.southam.com/calgaryherald/ (Reuters) ATHENS Police arrest drug-smuggling mules Greek police arrested 12 mules carrying about two tonnes of cannabis near the border with Albania on Wednesday and were holding them pending investigation, police said. "The mules are trained to follow mountain paths from Albania into Greece," a police officer at the northern Greek town of Kastoria said. Drug smugglers have used mules to bring narcotics from Albania across Greece's northern border before but it has usually been one animal. "This time we had a big group. We really don't know what to do with them," he said. A group of collaborators believed to be waiting for the mules at a Greek village about four kilometres from the border fled when they saw the police. "We have made no arrests, other than the mules," the officer said. -------------------------------------------------------------------
The articles posted here are generally copyrighted by the source publications. They are reproduced here for educational purposes under the Fair Use Doctrine (17 U.S.C., section 107). NORML is a 501 (c)(3) non-profit educational organization. The views of the authors and/or source publications are not necessarily those of NORML. The articles and information included here are not for sale or resale.
Comments, questions and suggestions.Reporters and researchers are welcome at the world's largest online library of drug-policy information, sponsored by the Drug Reform Coordination Network at: http://www.druglibrary.org/
Next day's news
Previous day's news
to 1998 Daily News index for March 5-11
to Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980305.html