-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyer Lets Grief Propel His Fight For Medical Pot ('The Los Angeles Times'
Interviews Robert L. Kennedy, The Attorney Representing Marvin Chavez
Pro Bono - As Director Of The Orange County Patient, Doctor And Nurse
Support Group, A Cannabis Club Based In Garden Grove, Chavez
Supplied Kennedy's Son-In-Law With Medical Marijuana As He Was Dying
From Brain Cancer, Prolonging And Enhancing His Life)
Date: Tue, 07 Jul 1998 19:07:22 -0700
From: Dan Bunnell (danrb@earthlink.net)
Subject: L.A. Times 7/6/98
Lawyer Lets Grief Propel His Fight for Medical Pot
* Law: Grateful to the man who helped ease his dying son-in-law's pain,
Robert L. Kennedy seeks to beat the case against the supplier.
By LISA RICHARDSON
Times Staff Writer
Ask him, and attorney Robert L. Kennedy can tell you the exact
moment of his conversion to the controversial medical
marijuana movement and his motivation for taking one of its
most important cases.
It's been almost one year since his son-in-law died of brain cancer,
and Kennedy still cannot accept the death of the loving husband and
father who had been an altar boy until age 21.
Pictures of his late son-in-law, Paul Comouche, dot Kennedy's
well-appointed office. There's one of the dark-haired, movie-star
handsome Comouche with Debbie, Kennedy's daughter. Another of
Comouche with a 5 o'clock shadow, grinning alongside his 2-year-old
daughter - Kennedy's granddaughter.
Then there are the pictures kept out of sight. Comouche wasting
away, Comouche without hair. It was this painful period and his
beloved son-in-law's death that led Kennedy to an unlikely alliance
with the medicinal marijuana movement.
When Comouche was dying in 1997, dozens of medicines failed to
ease his pain. Kennedy read that marijuana helped other cancer
patients and begged his son-in-law to try the drug.
Then Kennedy contacted Marvin Chavez, the director of the Patient,
Doctor, Nurse Support Group, a cannabis club based in Garden
Grove.
Chavez steadily provided Comouche with marijuana until Comouche
died last year at age 31. So when Chavez was arrested in April on
charges that he sold marijuana to an undercover officer posing as a
caretaker for a terminally ill patient, Kennedy took the case for free,
out of gratitude.
Kennedy recalled that Comouche's nausea subsided and his appetite
returned after using the drug. His son-in-law also lived within 10 days
of a full year, although doctors had given him six months to live.
"I have a soft spot in my heart for Marvin," Kennedy said of Chavez,
who took many legal risks. "I didn't have to expose my license to
jeopardy; I didn't have to go to clients of mine who are dealers or go
into the street and get ripped off."
A finely carved statuette of Don Quixote stands in the corner of
Kennedy's Long Beach office, a gold-handled sword in one of
Quixote's hands and an open book in the other. When it comes to the
Chavez case, Kennedy sometimes views himself as the fanciful
knight of literature who yearned to combat the world's evil but ended
up tilting at windmills.
"My first thought when I met Marvin and saw how they were
distributing marijuana was: 'This ain't gonna work in Orange
County.' "
The county's reputation for conservatism, Sheriff Brad Gates'
campaign against Proposition 215 - the successful ballot measure
seeking to make marijuana available for medicinal purposes - and the
fact that many of the judges in Orange County were once
prosecutors make the case challenging, he said.
Several of his colleagues agree there are obstacles to Kennedy's
winning the case.
"But this goes to Bob's own personal sense of what is right," said
family law attorney Boo Giuffre. "That's why he's willing to deal with
the D.A. where a lot of us at some point just throw our hands in the
air and say, 'You win.' "
Also, Kennedy makes no secret about the fact that he enjoys
challenging the odds.
"It's not popular to say so, but a defense attorney is really liberty's
last champion, and Bob Kennedy exemplifies that," said lawyer Stephanie
Loftin.
Orange County may be unlikely territory in which to blaze a trail for
the use of medicinal marijuana, but Kennedy has had tough fights
before.
In September 1995 he represented the California Grocers Assn. after
racist pamphlets had been tucked inside products in stores in Orange,
Los Angeles and Ventura counties. The association had endured the
problem for two years before hiring Kennedy.
Although no law had specifically prohibited the pamphlet insertions if
product seals weren't broken or food actually touched, Kennedy won
permanent injunctions against a Glendale man said to be behind the
pamphlets.
He also won injunctions in three counties against the White Aryan
Resistance, whose members, including the Glendale man, were
believed to be behind the pamphlet insertions. The injunction bars
them from such insertions. Three months later, the state Legislature
enacted a law making all such distributions illegal.
The perpetrators "knew just how far they could go and what they had
to do to stay somewhere on the borderline of the law," said Don
Beaver, former president of the California Grocers Assn. "Bob
Kennedy's a real bulldog - that's why we used him. We knew he'd go
after this guy with passion, and he did."
Kennedy believes the law is on Chavez's side. Proposition 215 may
be poorly drafted, he said, but its intent is clearly to help people
who are ill.
Orange County officials simply plan to ignore the law, he said.
He cites passages of Proposition 215 - also called the Compassionate
Use Act of 1996 - whose stated purpose is "to encourage the federal
and state governments to implement a plan to provide for the safe
and affordable distribution of marijuana to all patients in medical
need of marijuana."
Officials should have helped Chavez distribute marijuana legally
rather than letting him flounder, Kennedy said.
Deputy Dist. Atty. Carl Armbrust sees it differently. Chavez
maintained he was just seeking a donation when he asked the
undercover officer for money, but police and prosecutors say that he
was conducting a drugs-for-money transaction - illegal even under
Proposition 215.
Armbrust maintains that once money is received in return for
marijuana, the law has been broken.
Chavez, a slight man with a wiry build who suffers from a
degenerative back disorder, was recently released on $100,000 bail
after three months in jail. He has tried a variety of prescription drugs
but said none work as well as marijuana, which is why he champions
its use. "I'm willing to do the time and fight for the cause in an ethical,
practical and peaceful way, but definitely, we're going to win,"
Chavez said.
Kennedy, he said, is the ideal lawyer for the case.
"He's been there with the movement, and now it's time to use his
experience as an attorney to defend the spirit of the law for the
people."
Like Chavez, Kennedy is optimistic that marijuana one day will be
prescribed by doctors and supplied by pharmacies. And he is ready to
tell his personal story to anyone who wants to listen.
Why go after sick people seeking solace from marijuana? he asks.
Looking at his daughter's wedding picture, he added: "No one who
has seen a close relative die an agonizing death would do it. . . . I
wouldn't wish this last year of hell that my family has suffered on
anybody, but maybe that's what it takes for people to understand."
Copyright Los Angeles Times
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ex-Guard Tells Of Brutality, Code Of Silence At Corcoran
('The Los Angeles Times' Says The Conscience Of Former Corcoran State Prison
Guard Roscoe Pondexter Has Reawakened And He Has Decided To Expose
Corcoran's Brutality, Talking To 'The Times' And Testifying Before A Federal
Grand Jury, Pointing The Finger Not Only At Himself But At Those Above Him
Who He Says Sanctioned The Systematic Brutality, Including Encouraging
Inmates Who Were Sexual Predators To Rape Other Inmates)
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 1998 15:12:59 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Ex-Guard Tells of Brutality,
Code of Silence at Corcoran
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield
Pubdate: Mon, 6 Jul 1998
Source: Los Angeles Times (CA)
Contact: letters@latimes.com
Fax: 213-237-4712
Website: http://www.latimes.com/
Author: Mark Arax, Times Staff Writer
EX-GUARD TELLS OF BRUTALITY, CODE OF SILENCE AT CORCORAN
Prison: Former officer claims supervisors sanctioned violence, including
rapes that still haunt a former inmate.
It's been two years since guard Roscoe Pondexter walked the cellblocks of
Corcoran, two years since he wrapped his big basketball hands around the
neck of an inmate and squeezed until the air nearly went out.
"Now don't you go passing out on me, you hear?" he would whisper as he
squeezed a little more, until he heard that tiny gurgle and the inmate had
the eyes of someone drowning. That's when a partner would yank on the
inmate's testicles while two higher-ranking officers stood outside the
cell, pretending all was fine and blocking any view inside.
Welcome to a counseling session at Corcoran State Prison, a little attitude
adjustment for inmates who needed reminding of the rules.
And no guard did it better than 6-foot-7-inch, 270-pound Pondexter.
"We called it Deep Six. It's like taking a dive underwater and not coming
up. You give the prisoner only enough air to hear your message. . . . It
wasn't in the manual. It wasn't part of the official training. It was
grandfathered into me by my sergeant and the sergeant before him.
"It was brutality, but we never left a mark." He was once one of
California's most celebrated prep basketball players, a college
all-American at Cal State Long Beach drafted by the Boston Celtics. His
playing days over, he found himself walking the line inside Corcoran's
Security Housing Unit, staring across bars at some of the most-feared
killers in the state.
Like in his hoop game, he didn't give a damn who was on the other side.
"I'll be honest with you. I was known as the Bonecrusher. I was used as an
intimidation factor. When brute force was needed to get an inmate to
comply, they called me in. 'Pondexter, take care of it.' " Today, two
years after being forced to resign for a counseling session that turned
into a fight, the 45-year-old Pondexter is a different man. His three
children refer to him as Dad One and Dad Two: the father who came home
each day but could never leave Corcoran behind, and the father who was
stripped of his job only to rediscover the values that his parents, Dust
Bowl cotton pickers, had passed on to him.
As part of that awakening, he has decided to expose Corcoran's brutality,
talking to The Times and testifying before a federal grand jury, pointing
the finger not only at himself but at those above him who he says
sanctioned the violence.
The grand jury has charged eight officers with setting up inmate fights for
blood sport at Corcoran, where 50 inmates were wounded or shot dead by
guards since 1989. As the FBI expands its probe into alleged brutality and
cover-up at the San Joaquin Valley prison, Pondexter has joined the handful
of officers who have broken rank and come forward.
"A lot of things I did then I would never do now. But that's the mentality
of the place. That's the socialization. I didn't care if someone got raped
or if someone got killed by staff. It was just another day's work. Pushing
paper and we're off again. . . . Bit by bit, I lost my conscience." One
of a Thousand Crips and Bloods Pondexter had seen a thousand Eddie Dillards
come and go, Crips and Bloods from Compton and Watts, small in stature and
big in mouth, punks who gave hard-working black people like himself a bad
name.
Dillard was a lightweight by Corcoran standards, a 23-year-old first-timer
with a conviction for assault with a deadly weapon. He could have chosen
to do his time hassle-free but he made one mistake: He kicked a female
officer at Calipatria State Prison and now he found himself inside the
Corcoran SHU, where such transgressions did not go unpunished.
Dillard was a marked man. Pondexter said he surmised this as soon as he
learned about the transfer form sent down by his sergeant.
Dillard, who looked like a skinny teenager, was to be moved into the cell
of Wayne Robertson, a big, buffed-up prison enforcer who boasted in
official reports that he raped unruly inmates as a favor to Corcoran staff.
Robertson, a murderer serving a life term, wasn't shy about being called
the "Booty Bandit." He told corrections investigators that any time the
SHU supervisors needed an inmate to be "checked," they could call on him.
Depending on his mood, he said, he would either rape or beat them. He got
extra food and tennis shoes in return.
"I didn't know what wrong Dillard had done, but my superiors obviously
wanted him punished," Pondexter said. "Everyone knew about Robertson. He
had raped inmates before and he's raped inmates since.
"He would always tell us, 'If you have any loudmouths or any inmates you
can't control and need to be taught a lesson, put them in the house with
me.' The Booty Bandit was just one of the tools of punishment that we
used." If Pondexter had a pang of doubt or pity as he and other officers
directed Dillard toward Robertson's cell that day in March 1993, he does
not remember it. He said he was just a grunt following the orders of his
commanding officer, Sgt. Alan Decker. Questioning a superior was like
questioning a coach. It wasn't something he had ever done.
"To stand up for Dillard would have meant betraying the code of silence and
putting my sergeant on the spot. And I wasn't going to give up my
sergeant."
'They Took Something Away From Me'
Eddie Dillard sits in the sparse living room of his tidy apartment in
Northridge, not far from the junior college he now attends. His wife,
studying to get her master's degree in psychology, works at a
good-paying job. During the day, he tends to their toddler son born
a year after his release from prison. He wonders if he is up to the task,
wonders if he will ever stop running from that night in Robertson's cell.
"They took something away from me that I can never replace. I've tried so
many nights to forget about it, but the feeling just doesn't go away.
Every time I'm with my wife, it comes back what he did to me. I want a
close to the story. I want some salvation. But it keeps going on and on."
His words tumble out in a strong voice, and he is not past anger and
tears. He said he has committed the names of each of the officers, what
they did and failed to do, to memory.
He has named four officers as defendants in a lawsuit against the state set
for trial this fall. His account is backed up by Pondexter, corrections
investigative reports, state agents and the statements Robertson made to
investigators.
With the exception of Pondexter, none of the named officers, including
Decker, responded to requests for interviews. But in court papers, they
deny any wrongdoing and their attorney in the civil case said he would
wait until the trial to tell their side.
Dillard had been at Corcoran about a week when he was told: "Roll up your
crap, you're moving." Officer Anthony Sylva and another officer escorted
him from one section of the SHU to the other, he said.
Along the way, they informed him that his new cellmate would be Robertson.
"I told them, 'You can't put me in there. This guy's my enemy. He's a
sexual predator.' " A few years earlier, at another prison, Dillard had
spurned Robertson's sexual advances, and this led to a fight. Dillard so
feared Robertson that he listed him as an enemy in his personal file.
Under prison policy, this alone should have precluded any move into
Robertson's cell.
Dillard said Sylva responded: "It's happening. Since you like hitting
women, we've got somebody for you." During the move, they were met by
Pondexter and Sgt. Decker. Dillard said he lodged more protests, but no
one would listen, and he was led to Robertson's cell. As soon as the door
clanged shut, Robertson began to lecture him. He was there because Decker
thought he needed to be "taught a lesson on how to do your time," Robertson
told him, according to internal reports. You know better than to be
kicking a female officer, he said.
Dillard tried to appeal to Robertson's street loyalties, reminding him that
they came from the same neighborhood. But he said Robertson would hear none
of it.
The lights went out and the 230-pound Robertson grabbed at him.
Dillard, who weighed 120 pounds, fought back but Robertson was too
powerful. He said he pounded on the cell door, banged at it in a way that
the guards surely must have heard, but nobody ever came as he was raped.
"It's not something you can forget. That shame kind of holds you.
It's not like going out and getting hit by a car or something and then a
couple of days later you can say, 'Yeah, I got hit by a car and survived.'
This is kind of something different. It's like your life is on the line. It
feels like you're being killed. Just slowly."
When the guards finally did arrive, it was hours too late. Dillard said he
told them his life was in danger and hinted that he had been sexually
assaulted. He was not more explicit because that would have been snitching,
grounds for Robertson to kill him.
He said Officer Joe Sanchez laughed in his face and told him, "You can hit
a woman but you can't fight him back?" Over the next two days, Dillard
said, he was raped again and again.
When the cell door later opened, Dillard ran out and refused to go back in.
Officer Michael Coziahr was the only one who showed any interest in what
had happened to him, Dillard said. Coziahr got Dillard to admit that he had
been raped and called a medical technician to examine him, according to
investigative reports.
Coziahr walked up to Robertson's cell, noticed him smiling, took down his
admission. "Yeah, I punked him," he said Robertson told him. Robertson
later marveled how Dillard kept his pride during the assault and didn't
snitch. Of course, he had no choice. "I could have broke his neck,"
Robertson told investigators.
Coziahr was angry and hand-carried his report to Sgt. Jeff Jones, but no
internal inquiry was ever done, according to investigative reports. Coziahr
said a frustrated Jones told him, "What do you want me to do with this?
Nobody wants to do anything about it." Dillard was supposed to be
transferred to an outside hospital for a full rape examination, but the
orders were canceled by an unknown officer, the reports show.
Moved to a different cell, Dillard began scrawling out on a sheet of paper
the germ of his lawsuit. He said Decker came by and told him to stop
making noise or he would be sent back to Robertson's cell.
"No one cared because I was a convicted criminal," Dillard said. "I somehow
deserved it. Society don't care what happens behind bars." Dillard said he
understands the impulse to conceal. He said he learned from six years in
prison that guards were their own gang, with a peculiar language and walk
and code. "They have that same camaraderie as street gangs, the same
silence." But the tall black officer named Pondexter, who came up to his
cell after that first night and politely listened to his complaints but
did nothing, somehow troubles him even more than those who laughed in his
face.
"I felt like this man is black and he knows what these officers are doing
and he is condoning it just by saying nothing," he said. "I try to
rationalize it. He probably needs that job. He don't need the pressure from
his peers. I ask all these questions but I can never find the answers." A
Conscience Turned Numb Roscoe Pondexter says Dillard does not know what he
knows or where he has been. Not even his own wife, a prison guard herself,
fully understands the four years he spent inside the twisted world of the
Corcoran SHU, how his conscience turned numb over time, almost
imperceptibly, bit by bit.
"You let your conscience take a walk, Roscoe," his wife, Doris, tries to
explain for him. "You did that to survive. You were a foot soldier. It was
the guys above, the Hitlers, who were the architects and sent down the
orders." "I didn't have a conscience, Doris," he says, shaking his head.
He was a company man. When he joined up at Corcoran, he said, his superiors
confronted him with a choice. You'll never be trusted until you give us
something we can hold over your head. You bleed and we'll bleed. They
taught him pressure points and control holds.
How to administer pain and straighten out an inmate without a bruise left
behind.
When an inmate rubbed feces all over his body or masturbated in front of a
female officer, Pondexter would be called in to counsel.
"The counseling session was all about context, what will be tolerated and
what will not be tolerated. It was all about control." By his way of
thinking, he drew a line and never crossed it. Not once, he said, did he
ever beat an inmate or use anything but the force necessary to secure a
situation. Once the handcuffs were on, it was over. He said he saw too
many officers who got a kick out of gratuitously beating or torturing
inmates.
He remembers no turning point, no epiphanies where his eyes suddenly opened
and he saw the light. But a few incidents in 1994 and 1995 do stand out. He
recalled the inmates who had just arrived from Calipatria Prison, where
they had cut an officer's face. Pondexter said their introduction to
Corcoran was being forced to stand barefooted on the scorching asphalt
until they collapsed from third-degree burns. Like all the abuse he
witnessed, he said, this one was covered up too.
Officers told the medical staff that the injuries occurred while the
inmates were playing handball. "One of the guys had no bottoms of his feet
left," Pondexter said. "It was the biggest lie ever told." He recalled one
beating that a group of officers administered to a convicted child killer
in front of several supervisors. The beating was provoked by one supervisor
who displayed photographs of the young murder victim -- the inmate's own
son.
"He kicked him to death with steel-toed boots and threw his body in a
dumpster," Pondexter said. "The first photo was of the boy smiling and
riding a horse at some party. The second photo was his autopsy.
The guys went nuts and beat him down right there in the committee room.
"I watched the whole thing. I wasn't swinging on the guy, but I was right
there. I did nothing to stop it because I thought the guy deserved it. I
kept my mouth shut. I knew how to keep my mouth shut."
And then there was the rape of Dillard.
Last year, a special team of corrections investigators tried to make a case
against seven officers and supervisors for aiding and covering up the
attack. They had the statements of Dillard and Officer Coziahr and an
admission from Robertson, who had a dozen prior rapes documented in his
prison file.
But Pondexter was among those officers who refused to talk, and the local
prosecutor declined to take the case to the grand jury.
Two of the officers were later promoted. Now the FBI is investigating, and
Pondexter has agreed to cooperate, recently telling his account of the rape
and cover-up to a federal grand jury in Fresno.
"Pondexter is probably the most stand-up officer to come forward," said a
federal source involved in the case.
Lessons of Character It is Father's Day 1998, and the pastor at a Baptist
church in northeast Fresno is delivering a stemwinder about the value of a
good name and how to redeem the reputation tarnished.
"I'd rather be poor with a good name than rich with no name at all," Pastor
Chester McGensy booms. "The character of your name. What you do when your
family isn't watching. It's worth more than gold." He asks those who have
strayed to come to the front of the cavernous hall, and Pondexter stands
high above them, head bowed and shaven, polished clean.
After the service, he is greeted by those who remember him as one of the
finest basketball players to ever come out of Fresno. A few of them know
about his time at Corcoran, how it ended with him being fired for what
Pondexter describes as little more than a sanctioned counseling session,
something he had done a hundred times.
"Roscoe has rebuilt his good family name," the pastor says. "He's made his
wife, his parents and his children proud of him." Back at home, Pondexter
is asked what he would do if the clock was turned back five years and
Eddie Dillard was pleading with him again from the other side of the bars.
There's a long pause.
"That's a hard question to answer. First, I believe God has forgiven me,
and I forgave myself. I did what I had to do at the time to be a good
correctional officer. What do you do to stop it? You're part of it, man. I
probably would have talked to Dillard straight. And I probably would have
never let them put him in that cell in the first place."
Copyright Los Angeles Times
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DC Initiative 59 To Appear On November Ballot (A News Release
From Colorado Citizens for Compassionate Cannabis Notes Volunteers
In Washington, DC, Have Filed Enough Signatures To Put A Local
Medical Marijuana Measure Before Voters)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 11:46:02 -0600 (MDT)
From: "Colo. Cannabis" (cohip@levellers.org)
To: "Colo. Hemp Init. Project" (cohip@levellers.org)
Subject: DC Init. 59 to Appear on Nov. Ballot
July 6, 1998
D.C. MEDICAL MARIJUANA PETITIONS TURNED IN
Initiative 59 to be on the November Ballot
Washington, DC -- Organizers for DC's Ballot Initiative 59 submitted
petition sheets containing some 32,000 signatures to the DC Board of
Elections and Ethics on Monday, July 6, 1998. Measure 59, which will be
placed on the upcoming general election ballot on November 3, proposes to
protect persons with serious and terminal illnesses such as cancer,
glaucoma, and advanced stages of AIDS, if they are told by their doctor to
use small amounts of marijuana to ease their suffering.
DC AIDS activist Steve Michael, Initiative 59's original sponsor,
transferred the Measure to his partner of 7 years, Wayne Turner, the day
before he entered the Intensive Care Unit of the Washington Hospital
Center. "You have to keep going on the Initiative," Michael instructed,
"just in case I don't make it." Steve Michael, 42, died from AIDS four
weeks later, on May 25.
A determined group of local activists vigorously hit the streets, gathering
the signatures of at least 5% of DC registered voters, a total 16,997, in
order to place Initiative 59 on the November ballot.
"This campaign for Initiative 59 has been nothing less than an act of
love," states Wayne Turner, of the AIDS advocacy group ACT UP/DC. "From
everyone who circulated the petitions to those who signed, there is
compassion, and hope for the sick and dying."
In order to qualify Initiative 59 for the November election ballot, at
least 5% of the total number of District registered voters, representing at
least five of the eight wards, need to sign petitions. Activists have
verified more than 18,000 valid signatures for Initiative 59, matching
names and addresses based upon the District's own voter rolls. According to
I-59's calculations, the minimal amount has been exceeded in 6 of the
District's 8 Wards.
"Our local, grassroots campaign, funded on a shoestring budget, proves that
democracy is alive and well here in the District of Columbia." adds Turner.
"We're going to win in November!"
The group's earlier effort, Initiative 57, fell short last year of the
requisite signature requirement, prompting an ongoing lawsuit challenging
DC's inflated voter rolls.
Special thanks to the DC Green Party, with support from the Whitman-Walker
Clinic, and the African American Catholic Congregation, and all our
volunteers!
***
Note from CCCC: The AIDS activists in DC have scored a huge victory on
behalf of patients and grassroots patient advocates. The Yes on 59
Campaign deserves all the support you can give. Please forward this
message to discussion groups, the Usenet, or other interested parties.
Donations can be made to:
Yes on 59 Campaign
409 H Street N.E. - Suite #1
Washington, D.C. 20002-4335
Phone: (202) 547-9404
Fax: (202) 547-9448
For more information on the DC campaign, see:
http://www.actupdc.org
http://www.levellers.org/dcstat.html
***
Photos of Steve Michael's Political Funeral - June 4, 1998
http://www.sinkers.org/actupdc_funeral/index.html
http://www.actupny.org/reports/SteveMichael.html
***
Distributed by:
Colorado Citizens for Compassionate Cannabis
P.O. Box 729
Nederland, CO 80466
Phone: (303) 784-5632
Email: cohip@levellers.org
Web: http://www.levellers.org/cannabis.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Losing The Drug War ('Calgary Sun' Columnist Bill Kaufmann
Writes About Vancouver, British Columbia, Police Constable Gil Puder,
Who Now Opposes The War On Some Drug Users)
From: creator@islandnet.com (Matt Elrod)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
Subject: Canada: Losing the drug war
Date: Mon, 06 Jul 1998 09:49:00 -0700
Lines: 91
Newshawk: creator@mapinc.org
Source: Calgary Sun
Contact: callet@sunpub.com
Pubdate: July 6, 1998
Author: BILL KAUFMANN -- Calgary Sun
LOSING THE DRUG WAR
CRIMINALIZED USERS ARE DEHUMANIZED WHILE WEALTHY DEALERS TAKE SMARMY REFUGE
Gil Puder has waged the war on drugs and seen its failure and
attendant propaganda for what it is.
For Puder, it's impossible to ignore -- he's a Vancouver police
constable on the un-winnable conflict's frontline.
The trophies showcased by narcotics officers -- their drug seizures
-- are astutely identified by Puder as flags of failure.
If the strategy of realizing a relatively drug-free society were
working, such exhibitionism would be infinitely more infrequent. But
for now, the tip of the iceberg show-and-tell is one way to justify
their budgets.
It's only one observation in a compelling recent presentation Puder
made to the conservative Fraser Institute.
The entire police ethos and the mandate to serve and protect has been
compromised and tainted by the counterproductive assault on liberty,
personal choice and addiction, writes Puder.
"The tactics, weaponry and propaganda of our 20th century narcotic
prohibition have been borrowed from a western military model, yet in
their misguided application have generated nothing other than systemic
conflict that has overwhelmed our justice and health-care systems,"
says Puder.
Certainly, police anti-drug strategies are a product of discredited
legislation, but Puder is clearly repelled by the attitudes and
tactics of his colleagues.
An atmosphere of cowboy machismo focused on compiling arrest
statistics with little hope of concrete progress is a hallmark of the
narcotics' units' world, he says.
Dehumanizing and arresting the criminalized users while wealthy
dealers take smarmy refuge behind their money and lawyers is the daily
dichotomy, he adds.
"With fiscal restraint and 'fear of crime' combining to place
enormous and often unrealistic expectations on police services, it's
easy to be pessimistic that open-mindedness will be rediscovered
soon," he laments.
He sees the lives of citizens and fellow-officers being risked
needlessly to a culture of violence created by a lucrative black
market fueled by prohibition.
In 1984, Puder tasted the horror when he shot to death an addict
robbing a bank, armed with a replica gun.
The four-year head of the Calgary Police Services' drug unit
dismisses Puder as "absolutely out to lunch."
Puder, adds Staff Sgt. Mike Cullen, would find little sympathy among
most officers, something the maverick cop would undoubtedly wear as a
badge of honor.
But at the same time, Cullen agrees the war on drugs is a futile one
-- with the resources being allocated now.
"He may be right on that point -- it's not working," says Cullen, who
attended the Fraser Institute conference.
Part of Cullen's solution: More money for enforcement.
But considering the American experience of pouring tens of billions
of dollars down prohibition's black hole, it's a dubious proposition.
To be fair, Cullen also champions two other prongs -- harm reduction
and education. Whether law enforcement compliments them is
questionable.
"There's no easy answer," says the staff sergeant.
In the meantime, money and energy that could be used for education,
treatment and other policy alternatives will continue to be wasted on
our streets.
Copyright (c) 1998, Canoe Limited Partnership.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Awaiting Trial - American's Two Years In Latin Jail
('The Christian Science Monitor' Says James Williams, A Fish Importer
From Jacksonville, Florida, Has Been Held In A Prison In Ecuador
Without Trial For Nearly Two Years In What He Says Began As A Campaign
By FBI Agents To Pressure Him Into Testifying
Against A Suspected Drug Trafficker)
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 13:58:01 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ben (ben@hemp.net)
To: hemp-talk@hemp.net
Subject: HT: More Drug War Atrocities - spread the word (fwd)
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Sun, 5 Jul 1998 18:59:52 +0000
From: Jay Stewart (cosmo@olywa.net)
Subject: More Drug War Atrocities - spread the word
MONDAY, JULY 6, 1998
Awaiting Trial - American's Two Years In Latin Jail
Warren Richey
Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
MIAMI - A fish importer from Jacksonville, Fla., has been held in a prison
in Ecuador without trial for nearly two years in what he says began as a
campaign by FBI agents to pressure him into testifying against a suspected
drug trafficker.
In the United States such punishment without due process of law would be a
violation of constitutional rights. But James Williams is not in the United
States. And US officials say they have no intention of interfering in the
sovereign workings of the Ecuadoran justice system.
International law experts say Mr. Williams is stuck in a kind of
constitutional twilight zone, where American drug agents working behind the
scenes through Ecuadoran proxies could do almost anything they want to
increase the pressure on an imprisoned US citizen.
Long wait: James Williams, a US citizen, has been in an Ecuadoran jail since
1996. He insists he's done no wrong. (Photo courtesy of Robin Williams)
"It comes down to this issue: Whether the US government can prompt foreign
governments to do things that the fourth, fifth, and sixth amendments [to
the US Constitution] would forbid our government from doing," says
Christopher Blakesley, a law professor at Louisiana State University in
Baton Rouge. "They think that now the way they can resolve all the
constitutional problems they face is to get foreign countries to do their
dirty work."
The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) and federal prosecutors deny any
wrongdoing. They insist Williams's situation in Ecuador is the result of
independent actions taken by Ecuadoran officials without US involvement. In
a November 1997 letter to a member of Congress, DEA chief Thomas Constantine
wrote in part: "The investigation itself was conducted unilaterally by the
Ecuadoran National Police Narcotics Division."
Court documents tell a different story. A letter found in a court file by
Williams's lawyer suggests the DEA requested the Williams investigation and
his eventual arrest in Ecuador. And a State Department report acknowledges
that the investigation was conducted with US assistance.
Mr. Constantine insists that the DEA letter was written simply in response
to a request by Ecuadoran officials for information about Williams.
The case raises fundamental questions of how much due-process protection
Williams should get. In 1957, the Supreme Court ruled that constitutional
protections under the Bill of Rights apply when US citizens face US
government law-enforcement action in foreign countries.
"When the government reaches out to punish a citizen who is abroad, the
shield which the Bill of Rights and other parts of the Constitution provide
to protect his life and liberty should not be stripped away just because he
happens to be in another land," the ruling says in part.
Experts say the Williams case takes the issue into a new area - one the
court hasn't addressed. "What rights does an American citizen have when a
foreign jurisdiction has acted at the behest of the United States? The
answer is none," says Wilmer Parker, a defense lawyer in Atlanta and a
former federal prosecutor.
Origins of the case
Williams's ordeal began in April 1996, when he was contacted by FBI agents
seeking his testimony. The agents told him that one of his fish suppliers in
Colombia, José Castrillon, was a drug trafficker. They wanted Williams to
testify against him.
Williams said that as far as he knew, Mr. Castrillon was a legitimate fish
seller. He said he had no knowledge of drug trafficking or any other illegal
operations.
The agents didn't believe him. Williams invited the agents to investigate
his business, including the traceable wire transfers used in all his
financial dealings with Castrillon. He turned over more than five boxes of
business records, according to his lawyer.
Prison life: James Williams awaits trial in this Ecuador jail. He has been
in prison since 1996 and says the US is pressuring him to testify against a
suspected drug dealer. (Photo courtesy of Robin Williams)
By July 1996, Williams hadn't heard from the FBI and wanted to finish a
pending project in Ecuador. His lawyer checked with the FBI and was told
that the bureau had no objection to Williams traveling to Ecuador.
A month later, on Aug. 14, 1996, a DEA agent based in Ecuador wrote a letter
to Ecuadoran counter-narcotics officials in which he identified James
Williams and five other men as being members of a "narcotrafficking
organization." The letter does not say Williams is a suspect, rather it says
that investigations have "established" his membership in the criminal
organization. No specific evidence is offered. The letter concludes with a
request that Williams and the others be investigated "and steps be taken, as
the case may require, for the purposes of disarming this international
drug-trafficking organization."
When Williams arrived in Ecuador in September 1996, he assumed the FBI had
investigated him and that he was free to continue conducting his fish
business. But within days of his arrival, he was arrested by Ecuadoran
narcotics policemen. He says he was interrogated for three days before
anyone was allowed to see him.
Two weeks after his arrest, Williams's lawyer in the US, Isaac Mitrani, says
he received a call from an FBI agent. The agent wondered if Williams was
ready now to cooperate, and if so, federal agents could help him get out of
prison in Ecuador. Williams refused, saying all he wanted to do was tell the
truth.
Mr. Mitrani says the FBI called back a month later, this time saying that
Panama would soon file charges against Williams, and if necessary, try him
in absentia. If he was inclined to cooperate, now was the time to do it, the
agent said, according to Mitrani. Charges were eventually filed in Panama
against Williams, but in late June a Panamanian judge threw them out for
lack of evidence.
Meanwhile, Williams remains imprisoned in Ecuador.
The DEA works closely with Ecuadoran antinarcotics officials. Human-rights
workers familiar with the political situation say US officials actually
helped draft Ecuador's tough antidrug law, which, for example, prohibits
bail for anyone like Williams who is arrested in a narcotics case.
'It is really some high-handed and pretty scary behavior on the part of the
US government.' - Joseph McNamara, a research fellow at the Hoover
Institution and a former police chief
In addition, US drug agents are well aware of the conditions that an
American or any other suspect would face once arrested in Ecuador. A US
State Department human-rights report released earlier this year paints a
sober picture:
* "The most fundamental human-rights abuse stems from shortcomings in the
politicized, inefficient, and corrupt legal and judicial system. People are
subject to arbitrary arrest; once incarcerated, they may wait years before
being convicted or acquitted unless they pay bribes."
* "Those [judges] charged with determining the validity of detention often
allowed frivolous charges to be brought, either because they were overworked
or because the accuser bribed them. In many instances, the system was used
as a means of harassment in civil cases in which one party sought to have
the other arrested on criminal charges."
* "Police continue to physically mistreat suspects and prisoners, usually with
impunity.... Victims reported that the police beat them, burned them with
cigarettes, applied electric shocks, or threatened them psychologically."
Going it alone
Instead of cooperating with the FBI and accepting FBI help to get out of
Ecuador, Williams attempted to fight back. He hired a lawyer in Ecuador. He
set up a Web site to publicize his plight. His wife, Robin, appealed to
members of Congress.
The campaign gained some momentum in Washington, but never got close to
sparking oversight hearings in either the House or Senate judiciary
committees. A further setback for Williams and his supporters came on June
1, when federal prosecutors in Tampa unsealed a superseding indictment of
Castrillon that named Williams as a co-conspirator. The indictment says
Williams acted as a cocaine smuggler, cocaine distributor, and money
launderer. But it cites no specific illegal acts by Williams.
Prosecutors declined to discuss the evidence against Williams. There is no
legal requirement that the evidence presented to the grand jury be disclosed
in an indictment.
If he is convicted of the US conspiracy charges, Williams faces up to life
in prison and $4 million in fines. In Ecuador, he faces roughly eight years
in prison if convicted.
In an interview conducted by telephone from prison, Williams says he wants
only one thing - the chance to defend himself in a US courtroom. He says he
is confident that once a US jury hears all the evidence in his case, he will
be acquitted. "All Robin and I have ever asked for is an opportunity to
present the truth. It can't happen here [in Ecuador]. I will be condemned
here without any proof or evidence," Williams says.
Williams says he believes he was indicted because his case was beginning to
attract interest among some members of Congress. Federal prosecutors say his
indictment was the decision of a federal grand jury.
At first, Williams says, he and his supporters welcomed the indictment
because they thought he would be returned to the US to stand trial with
Castrillon. But prosecutors in Tampa say that Williams must complete his
Ecuador case before being returned to face the US charges.
As a result of his ordeal in Ecuador, Williams has been imprisoned since
September 1996. He has lost his business, his life savings, and a
significant portion of his extended family's life savings. He is yet to be
arraigned in a US court of law.
"It is really some high-handed and pretty scary behavior on the part of the
US government," says Joseph McNamara, a research fellow at the Hoover
Institution and a former police chief.
Williams's supporters say even if he ever gets his day in US court, he may
be unable to pay for an effective defense.
"In my opinion they don't want me back in the United States right now
because I don't know anything that would hurt Castrillon, and there is a
good possibility that I might say something that could help Castrillon,"
Williams says.
"All we are asking is to bring him home and give him his right to
constitutional protections and a fair trial," says Mr. Mitrani.
The URL for this page is:
http://www.csmonitor.com/durable/1998/07/06/fp1s4-csm.htm
(c) Copyright 1997, 1998 The Christian Science Publishing Society. All
rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dutch Foreign Affairs Ministry Report On UNGASS - Plus Appendix
(A Dutch List Subscriber Posts A Translation Of The Report To The Dutch
House Of Commons On The United Nations' Recent Special Session In New York
To Expand The Global War On Some Drug Users - Plus A Passage
From The Netherlands' Official Statement Presented At UNGASS On June 10)
From: "mario lap" (mario@drugtext.nl)
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: LONG: (2nd version translation) dutch foreign
affairs ministery report on UNGASS + appendix
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 1998 00:10:48 +0200
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org
To the Chairman of the "Tweede Kamer der Staten Generaal" (dutch house of
commons), July 6, The Hague , Report on SAVVN (UNGASS) drugs (June 8 - 10)
The Special Session on Drugs of the General Assemby of the United Nations
(UNGASS) took place in New York during the 8th - 10th of June 1998. As
promised during the General Discussions with the permanent commission for
Foreign Affairs of the 27th of May 1998 I now present you the report on
UNGASS also on behalf of the Minister of Health, Welfare and Sport, the
Minister of Justice, the Minister of Internal Affairs and the Minister for
Development. The opinion of the government concerning UNGASS can be found in
my letters of January 26 and April 6 1998.
The delegation of the Kingdom of the Netherlands was lead by the undersigned
in the capacity of vice pime-minister. The further delegation consisted of
representatives of most related departments (Health, Justice, Internal and
Foreign Affairs, one representative of Aruba (the Dutch Antilles were not
represented), representatives from "the field" see my letter of May 29),
members of the second chamber M.J.M Vehagen and FCGM Timmermans as well as
Mrs N van den Broek of the first chamber.
The UNGASS meeting was of an exceptional character for all documents
presented (the political declaration, the declaration concerning guidelines
for demand reduction and five action plans/resolutions on synthetic drugs,
precursors, judicial cooperation, money laundering and alternative
development) were already totally agreed upon through diplomatic negotations
before the conference. No Party has attempted to break these negotation
results open during UNGASS. Nevertheless the Special Session was regarded of
great importance witness the fact of the large number of presidents (23) and
government leaders (8) attending and the "broad" composition of most
delegations consisting of representatives from both the legal and health
fields.
There was no question anymore of real negotations taking place and attention
was therefore centered around the speeches. These in themselves evidentally
did not produce an enequivocal picture, as the drug policies of the member
states of the UN still vary greatly among each other. However, UNGASS did
show that an agreement over two starting-points is growing. These starting
points are the collective responsibility of production and consumption
countries and, connected with that, the necessity of a well balanced
approach to demand and to supply. Here the most tangible result was formed
by the acceptance of the Declaration concerning Guidelines for Demand
Reduction which now, for the first time, provides for a formal basis for a
balanced approach. Only the interventions of some Asian countries (China,
Pakistan and India among others) contained a one-sided emphasis on repression.
Most traditional production countries welcomed the formal confirmation of
the principle of a balanced approach to demand and supply and regarded it as
an acknowledgement of the fact that production can not effectively be
combatted when demand is not restricted simultaneously. Furthermore they
made an urgent appeal to the Western countries, based on the principle of
collective responsibility, to give financial support to programs fighting
production (especially through alternative development) and
transportation(Andes countries and the countries around Afghanistan in
particular). They all consistentally related the drug problem in their
country to wider development issues such as combatting poverty.
In most speeches of Western countries the attention paid, within the subject
of demand reduction, to the necessity of care and treatment for drug users,
as well as of the mitigation of the negative results of drug use, was an
outstanding feature. New Zealand presented the most outspoken plea for a
pragmatic approach. Just as a number of other countries, such as Norway, New
Zealand placed drug use in the wider context of substance use (drugs,
tobacco, alcohol) in general.
There was much attention for the Dutch intervention, in which the positive
results of the Dutch policy were explained and a call for new strategies,
based on experience from practice, was made. Dutch policy does not just fit
in with the policies of the 'known' like minded (Canada, Australia, New
Zealand and Switzerland), but seems to find more and more acceptance among
EU partners, particularly Portugal, Italy, Austria and Belgium.
Portugal made a plea for a new drug policy with ample attention for harm
reduction and based on objective information instead of demagogy. Italy
stated that a repressive approach of drug users showed to be ineffective in
practice and that care and harm reduction represented a better strategy.
Austria reported a national policy with the possibility of alternatives for
prison sentences for drug users in the treatment sphere. Belgium announced
the introduction of a clear distinction in the prosecution policy between
soft and hard drugs.
The interventions of France and Sweden distinguished themselves unfavorably,
governed as they were by a repressive tone. Both countries maintained that
the risks of drug use (especially of soft drugs) were mistakenly played down.
It was noticeable that many interventions made a clear distinction between
heroin and cocaine on the one hand and synthetic drugs on the other,
considering the latter a growing danger for the future. Japan for example,
reported use of synthetic drugs already to be a greater problem than
traditional drugs. Except for a number of developping countries (such as
Morocco and some countries from Sub-Sahara Africa), France and Sweden,
member states in their interventions hardly ever mentionned cannabis use.
Liberalisation/legalisation was only brought up in a few interventions.
Switzerland emphasized in an extensive explanation that their heroin
prescription policy is by no means to be interpreted as a first step towards
legalisation. Liberalisation/legalisation was for the rest only mentionned,
directly or iondirectly, in the interventions of overt opponents such as
Sweden, France and Hungary, as well as by some, mostly African and Asian,
developping countries. The developping countries in question accuse Western
countries of inconsistency: where they demand strong measures of the
developping world, they are lenient themselves concerning drug use.
UNDCP, in most interventions, was rather left out in the cold. The initial
purpose of UNDCP Executive Director Arlacchi was to use the momentum of
UNGASS to convince the Member States to committ themselves politically and
financially to SCOPE (Strategy for Coca and Opium Poppy Elimination), a
strategy to totally eradicate the production of coca and poppy within ten
years. As is well-known, this target had fallen by the way-side during the
diplomatic negotations preceeding UNGASS. The General Assemby did not go
beyond the acceptance of the principle of a world wide approach, which seems
self-evident in view of the nature of the problem (as stated by the UK
speaking also for the EU: "It is no use stopping opium cultivation in one
place, just to see more grown elsewhere (and) we gain nothing by closing one
trafficking route to see another opened"). The General Assembly, through the
approval of the political declaration, did agree upon target dates for the
restriction of drug production and demand as well as for the fight against
money laundering. But no commitments were made for specific strategies to be
followed or with regard to the necessary financial resources. At the same
time the action plan for the eradication of illegal drug crops and
alternative development, which stipulates conditions for the appication of
the various instruments (such as alternative development, crop destruction
and law enforcement) as well as the requirements to be met by alternative
development programs, was agreed upon.
As said before, the acceptance of the Declaration on Guidelines for Demand
Reduction is the most tangible result of UNGASS. In the follow up to the
UNGASS most attention will therefor probably be paid to the implications of
this declaration. In the aftermath to UNGASS, UNDCP initiated a first
informal meeting of experts from a select group of countries, amongst which
the Netherlands, in order to study the ways in which the declaration can be
applied in practice and how UNDCP can play a facilitating role in the
process. The aim is to present detailed suggestions to the next meeting of
the Commission on Narcotic Drugs (March 1999).
The Netherlands government in the mean time intends to continue on the road
it has followed so far, namely making Dutch policies and the positive
results obtained through them as widely understood as possible (without, for
that matter, denying the problematic aspects attached to them), continuing
to enter into policy discussions based on experience obtained in practice
and furthering ever intenser practical cooperation, particularly with
neighboring countries.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs
***
Annex added by sender
***
The following is a passage from the Netherlands' intervention at the UNGASS
in New York on 10-6-98:
quote:
***
Mr. President,
Allow me to share with you some of the experiences of the Netherlands'
demand reduction policy. Our primary aim is to protect health and
social-well-being and to reduce the harm and risks associated with drug
abuse. Within this context, we believe that drug users should not be
criminalized for their habits, but, on the contrary, should be provided the
help they need. This policy has shown some positive results.
First, our policy prevents drug users from going underground, where we
cannot reach them. We have identified the various user groups and we know
their habits. This has enabled us to develop targeted policy measures, which
are more effective. By bringing it out into the open, drug use has become
less glamorous. The clearest example of this is the use of opiates. For
young people in the Netherlands now, heroine is for losers. Very few of them
would think of trying it.
Secondly, thanks to a high standard of treatment, care and risk
reduction, including methadone and needle exchange programmes, morbidity and
mortality among drug users are relatively low. Such measures are also
important to society in general, since they reduce the spread of infectious
diseases such as Tuberculosis, AIDS and Hepatitis.
Now, one may ask whether our programmes do not lead to an increase in
drug abuse. Our experience is that they do not. On the contrary, needle
exchange programmes, for instance, have not led to more intravenous drug
use, but they have led to less people sharing needles. Consequently, few
addicts in the Netherlands suffer from AIDS.
Mr President,
Each country must bear in mind that it should not impose its system on
other countries as the only right and proper one. This would deny the
specific circumstances of the drug problem that vary from country to
country. In regional and international discussions we must find out what is
the best approach for our peoples, based on experiences and arguments. We in
the Netherlands believe that we are on the right track, encouraged as we are
by results and figures. We have a wealth of experience in demand reduction
programmes and are willing to contribute to the further development of the
guiding principles on demand reduction and their implementation.
Whether the world will ever be completely free of drugs remains an open
question. Control of drugs and drug related problems seems a more attainable
goal. As we all know, even to reach this objective takes all the resources,
both political and financial, that we can bring to bear. The Kingdom of the
Netherlands stands ready to play its part. We look forward to working
together with all of you.
Thank you.
***
unquote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheating At The Olympics - Should History Be Rewritten? (The Transcript
Of An ABC 'Nightline' Discussion Focusing On Revelations
That The East German Swim Team In The 1970s And 1980s Won
So Many Gold Medals By Using Banned Performance Enhancing Drugs)
Date: Sat, 11 Jul 1998 19:02:15 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: Transcript: Cheating at the Olympics:
Should History Be Rewritten?
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family (mmfamily@ix.netcom.com)
Source: ABC News Nightline
Contact: niteline@abc.com
Website: http://www.abcnews.com/onair/nightline/
Pubdate: 6 Jul 1998
CHEATING AT THE OLYMPICS: SHOULD HISTORY BE REWRITTEN?
(This is an unedited, uncorrected transcript.)
FORREST SAWYER, ABC NEWS (VO) In the '70s and '80s, they overwhelmed their
Olympic competition.
EAST GERMAN LEADER The miracle about which the whole world is talking is no
secret. It's called socialism.
FORREST SAWYER (VO) It wasn't a miracle but it was a secret. The East
German swim team was powered by banned performance enhancing drugs.
RICA REINISCH We didn't think about what they gave us every day. We just
accepted it.
FORREST SAWYER (VO) Now, US swimmers are claiming the gold medals weren't
won, they were stolen.
WENDY BOLGIOLI Most of my teammates would have medals had it not been for
the East German women on steroids.
FORREST SAWYER (VO) Tonight, cheating at the Olympics, should history be
rewritten?
ANNOUNCER From ABC News, this is Nightline. Substituting for Ted Koppel and
reporting from Washington, Forrest Sawyer.
FORREST SAWYER It is a little like pulling a thread on a sweater, tug on it
long enough and the sweater begins to unravel. So it is with the use of
performance enhancing drugs in the highly competitive world of
international athletics. For years there were complaints the extraordinary
successes of East German athletes were powered by steroids. Only now is
that claim drawing real international attention. The center of it all is a
criminal trial underway in Germany charging former coaches and doctors on
the women's swimming team with using steroids to further an East German
state goal, winning Olympic gold to prove communism's superiority, and
badly damaging the athletes' health along the way. It is suspected as many
as 10,000 athletes may have been involved in the widespread program and as
you might guess, some of the swimmers who came in behind the East Germans,
many of them American, want the record set straight. They want the gold
medals they say are rightly theirs. But it is not as simple as one country
gone wrong. A member of a Czechoslovakian anti-drug commission now claims
it happened there, too. Chinese women swimmers have been accused of using
banned drugs and there is a growing belief that international athletics
today means competing against rivals who are likely on steroids. Now, as
the tale unravels in Germany, the size of the problem is gradually and
disturbingly being revealed. So tonight, drugs and Olympic gold, who are
the real winners and who are the cheats? Here's ABC's Sheila MacVicar.
SHEILA MACVICAR, ABC NEWS (VO) This is what dreams are made of. To reach
the pinnacle of sports, to pit your talent, your strength against the
world's best, to compete for your country at the Olympic games, to win.
RICA REINISCH, FORMER EAST GERMAN SWIMMER It was overwhelming. I couldn't
grasp it. I was just so happy.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Beginning in the 1970s, there was nobody better at
winning than the women who swam from East Germany. They came from nowhere
and suddenly again and again they were virtually unbeatable.
ULRIKE TAUBER, FORMER EAST GERMAN SWIMMER It was great. I had trained so
much and when I won it was like a confirmation, a very nice feeling.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) They were East Germany's wonder girls, medal bedecked
and honored, the pride of their nation. (on camera) The collapse of
communism brought an end to East Germany and its medal winning dynasty. But
in the thick of the cold war, the swimmers who ploughed up and down this
pool in what used to be East Berlin swam not just for the glory of sport.
For East Germany's leaders, their phenomenal successes were proof for all
of the supremacy of socialism. But they had a secret weapon. They called it
state plan 1425. (VO) It wasn't enough to find talented young athletes. The
East Germans wanted performance machines. In films kept secret for 20
years, they recorded their training techniques, electric shocks to make
muscles contract harder, bizarre tests to measure endurance and most
important, the little blue pills. Oral-Turinabol, a growth hormone that
builds muscles and makes women more like men, a steroid, a banned
substance. Rica Reinisch was one of the stars of that swimming dynasty,
setting world and Olympic records, winning three gold medals. She was just
15 when her coaches handed her steroids.
RICA REINISCH When I asked what they were, my coach said take it. It's good
for you. It will help your body to recover faster. We didn't think about
what they gave us every day. We just accepted it. That's the way it was.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) The steroids had a remarkable effect.
WENDY BOLGIOLI They were not great athletes, never had been, and all of a
sudden, a couple years before '76, they became incredible athletes, like
literally overnight.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Wendy Bolglioli was co-captain of the US swim team at
the Olympics in Montreal in 1976. She watched as the East Germans took 11
of 13 gold medals, towering ahead of one of the best American women's teams
ever assembled.
WENDY BOLGIOLI They didn't get touched out by a tenth of a second. They got
touched out by a full body length. That doesn't happen in any sport and
certainly not swimming.
1ST OLYMPIC COMMENTATOR Their training programs go further, they go one
step beyond ours.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Olympic commentators alternated between envy of the
East German system and hinting at the truth.
2ND OLYMPIC COMMENTATOR There have been dark rumors of excessive use of
steroids but none of these charges have been proved and the East Germans
march on.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) But the women who competed against the East Germans
had all the proof they needed. They heard their deep voices, saw the
muscles in their shoulders, their performance times and knew they were
cheating. When they spoke out no one wanted to listen.
WENDY BOLGIOLI I got hate mail. I got more mail that said, you know, you
are a sour grape American woman swimmer and you should be ashamed to be on
this Olympic team.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Many suspected what the American women openly talked
about but the East German athletic machine remained unchallenged for years.
The secret was safe. In 1989 as the state crumbled, people stormed the
archives of the secret police, hoping to preserve the files that would
reveal the crimes of their government. (on camera) Amongst these thousands
of files, investigators found in meticulous detail the records of East
Germany's state run doping program. They recorded everything, the names of
thousands of athletes and the doses of steroids they took, the schemes
designed to fool international testing. There were even memos talking about
what to say to curious athletes who asked too many questions. (VO)
Investigators have spent years poring over the files, building a case
against the doctors and coaches who gave steroids to thousands of athletes
knowing they could have serious side effects. Rica Reinisch was one of the
first athletes to talk publicly.
RICA REINISCH I only found out what had happened to me when I had to be
admitted to the hospital with a chronic ovarian infection. The blood tests
showed that I had too many male hormones in my body. They warned me they
might have to remove my ovaries.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) What investigators learned has led to the criminal
prosecution of swim coaches and doctors now underway in Berlin. They are
charged with causing bodily harm, harm that includes cancers, infertility,
birth defects and liver disease.
RICA REINISCH It's absurd. It's inhumane. They were experimenting with us.
ULRIKE TAUBER I've talked to many people, I've asked many people would I
have won in 1976 without the drugs? They tell me that's not how I should
look at it.
WENDY BOLGIOLI I have a lot of sympathy for them because they had to. Many
of them had to. Many of them didn't know what they were but that doesn't
make it OK. That does not make it OK.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) If the East Germans cheated, what about those who did
not?
WENDY BOLGIOLI Most of my teammates would have medals had it not been for
the East German women on steroids, and that's just a fact.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) The US women's swim team left Montreal with only one
gold medal. Now, American swimmers and others say they deserved more, that
they should get the medals and the rightful place in Olympic history that
for all these years has been occupied by East Germany.
FORREST SAWYER Who should have those medals and should Olympic history be
rewritten? Part two of Sheila MacVicar's report in a moment.
(Commercial Break)
FORREST SAWYER It's not as easy as it sounds. So many years after the
event, how can you determine what really happened? How much evidence do you
need to take away an Olympic gold medal? Once again, ABC's Sheila MacVicar.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) It's 7:00 am Stanford swim coach Richard Quick is
putting his team through their paces. He's a veteran of four American
Olympic swim teams and for years he kept quiet about East German cheating.
RICHARD QUICK I didn't want to sound like I was a cry baby, but it's simply
not fair to the athletes and it hasn't been fair for a long, long time. For
the East Germans to still have Olympic gold medals that are recognized in
the history books as being legitimately achieved is just a lie.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) The President of the US Olympic Committee, the USOC,
Bill Hybl, says he's still not convinced.
BILL HYBL It's way too soon to tell if there has been cheating and if that
cheating will be proven.
WENDY BOLGIOLI I am entitled to the gold medal. I won it fair and square.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Wendy Bolgioli took home a bronze medal in the 100
meter butterfly after she finished behind two East Germans. If the
International Olympic Committee, the IOC, were to punish the East Germans
for cheating, her medal would go from bronze to gold.
BILL HYBL And if it gets to the point where there's conclusive evidence
that comes out of these trials or other trials, you can count on the United
States Olympic Committee being very aggressive in our requests to the IOC
because ultimately the International Olympic Committee is in charge of the
medals.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) But the German criminal trials are based on the fact
that doping did take place. The only issue is whether the use of those
drugs caused the athletes criminal bodily harm.
RICHARD QUICK For us to take action only after we get absolute proof is
ridiculous.
WENDY BOLGIOLI USOC's comment by many of the USOC officials and IOC has
been, you know, if we point the finger, Wendy, you're going to make a
scandal. You point the finger and then people are going to be pointing the
finger back at us. So Wendy, it's better if you just keep your mouth shut.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Doping hasn't stopped. Earlier this year, Chinese
swimmers were caught with performance enhancing drugs. They now dominate
the swimming world and like the East Germans, many coaches attribute their
success to drugs and blame the sport's governing bodies and the IOC for
failing to take firm action.
WENDY BOLGIOLI If they could make a stand and say you're all going to get
caught and you're all going to pay a consequence, right now there are no
consequences.
ULRIKE TAUBER There's no consistency in what they're doing or saying. It's
all a big farce. And I'm convinced that either you draw a line and make
sure that sports are clean or stop talking about it.
SHEILA MACVICAR (VO) Should the East German women be punished for what
their government obliged them to do? Athletes say the decisions made now at
the highest levels of sport about the past may determine how fair and level
the playing field will be for those who compete in the future. I'm Sheila
MacVicar for Nightline in Berlin.
FORREST SAWYER When we come back, the question of Olympic gold medals, past
and future. We'll talk to a senior Olympic official and to a US swimming
coach.
(Commercial Break)
FORREST SAWYER Joining us now from Lausanne, Switzerland, Francois Carrard
has been the director general of the International Olympic Committee for
the past nine years. John Leonard has been the executive director of the
American Swimming Coaches Association since 1985 and he joins us from our
Miami bureau. Mr Carrard, I understand the desire to be cautious but what
it all comes down to, it's a question of evidence and how much evidence do
you need before you're prepared to take away an Olympic gold medal?
FRANCOIS CARRARD, INTERNATIONAL OLYMPIC COMMITTEE (Lausanne, Switzerland)
Well, this is a very delicate matter indeed because when one speaks about
it right now it may seem simple to try to rewrite history, to reallocate
the ranking and medals but, indeed, we must be very cautious because
inasmuch as I deeply feel for the athletes who fairly resent having been
deprived of their ranking and medals, when you have to reinvestigate facts
which are sometimes very old, very old, you have to be sure about all the
facts, about all the allegations.
FORREST SAWYER I understand Mr Carrard, but I must tell you there seems to
be at least some difference between caution and reluctance. Now you have
volumes of documents that have been turned over that were in the East
German files showing specific athletes who were given doses, who was giving
the doses to them. You have a sports physician admitting today in the trial
that he did make available antibiotic steroids and you had the athletes
themselves, some of them who are saying, indeed, they did take steroids.
Now, why isn't that enough evidence?
FRANCOIS CARRARD Well, first of all, I have to recall that the
International Olympic Committee was the first organization in the world
that started fight against doping. In 1968 ...
FORREST SAWYER I thank you for that sir, but we've got a very little amount
of time. The question is why isn't that enough evidence?
FRANCOIS CARRARD Well, you must take each evidence for each case because if
one athlete got a gold medal 20 years ago, 20 years ago, sometimes more,
having tested and being found not positive at the time based on the
methods, restory, reestablishing the evidence of what exactly took place,
how was that athlete actually doped or not doped, what was the status of
the athlete which should take or not take the ranking of the athletes.
There are currently procedures going on in Germany. These are criminal
procedures and we must know exactly the facts and the evidence. It's very
easy to see it like that.
FORREST SAWYER All right, so you'd like to wait until after the trial.
FRANCOIS CARRARD Right.
FORREST SAWYER Mr Leonard, are you satisfied with that?
JOHN LEONARD, AMERICAN SWIMMING COACHES ASSOCIATION (Miami) Forrest, I
think that's absolutely bizarre. The reason the IOC needs to be cautious
about this is because this has nothing whatsoever to do with sports. It has
everything to do with the IOC's business relationships with its sponsors.
As I said earlier in the show, once you start to pull on the thread of
this, the entire garment of the Olympic fabric begins to come apart. And
what you begin to realize is the IOC itself has nothing to do with sport.
It has to do with raising money and putting money in the IOC's coffers and
the relationships it has with its major sponsors.
FORREST SAWYER Well, you go leaping pretty far there Mr Leonard. Why isn't
it fair for Mr Carrard to say I understand that you want to do this but
this is a person's life and this is a person's medal and we want this trial
to proceed and we want to have all the evidence before us before we decide?
Mr Leonard?
JOHN LEONARD The evidence has been there since 1989 in various forms in
depth, from individuals, from documents in the German state plan. All the
evidence is there. The evidence has been there. The IOC doesn't want to act
on this because they don't want the full extent of doping in Olympic
activities revealed.
FORREST SAWYER The fact is, Mr Carrard, that charge has been made more and
more.
FRANCOIS CARRARD I think that charge is absolutely, absolutely wrong. I
would just like to remind Mr Leonard, who is quoting 1989, that in 1988 who
did withdraw the gold medal for doping at the most famous event of the
Olympics in Seoul? Ben Johnson for doping. It was the International Olympic
Committee and nobody else. And only since, and this is no coincidence, one
speaks now of 1989, I have to repeat that from '68 to '88, 20 years, the
IOC was absolutely alone. And it is easy now to take it on the IOC and on
the organizations which are, indeed, fighting against doping. There are
many organizations which are still not fighting against doping,
professional organizations in the world, and these are the real causes why
doping has been such a plague and not these allegations which are totally
out of place about the IOC sponsoring. This is ridiculous.
FORREST SAWYER Mr Leonard?
JOHN LEONARD Forrest, a gentleman by the name of Prince Alexandre de
Merode, who happens to be the chairman of the medical committee of the IOC,
has recently been quoted thusly. What we are dealing with here is a certain
kind of public relations issue. The public must be persuaded that something
is being done. Prince Alexandre de Merode is a gentleman without a medical
degree who runs the IOC medical committee, who has been guilty of losing, I
repeat, losing positive doping results in each of the last three Olympic
games.
FORREST SAWYER We have only a few seconds left before our break. Is there
any way that you can safety Wendy Bolgioli and say that there will be
sufficient evidence for you to make a call one way or the other, either you
will take the medal away or you will not?
FRANCOIS CARRARD What we are going to do in specific cases when we see the
actual evidence, and we have nothing yet on our table, we get accusations
over the air like that. There is no specific request yet on our table. We
will look into the situation, we will look into the evidence and we will
see what we can do in specific individual cases when the facts are
established. But it's easy to accuse us over the air like that, but we have
not yet a request and certainly not from Mr Leonard, on our table.
FORREST SAWYER Mr Leonard, we have a few seconds left, as I said. If you
would look ahead with me. What should be done now and toward the future to
eliminate the problem of doping?
JOHN LEONARD The IOC needs to put its wallet where its words are. Right now
they've waged a tremendous PR campaign about being the only organization
involved in doping. Now they need to take a significant percentage of their
dollars and put it there and get ahead of the back room basement chemists
who right now are ruining sports.
FORREST SAWYER Do you believe, Mr Leonard, that they can do that?
JOHN LEONARD I believe they can, but I don't believe they really want to.
FORREST SAWYER Mr Carrard, what should be done now to make sure that ...
FRANCOIS CARRARD There are scores of millions of dollars which are invested
every year in the fight against doping. If Mr Leonard deliberately chooses
to ignore that, that's his problem.
JOHN LEONARD I'd like to know how an organization like the IOC can spend
$42 million and not be able to get ahead of a bunch of basement chemists.
FORREST SAWYER Mr Carrard, it's a final question. Is the IOC doing all that
can and should be done? Can you do more to prevent doping in a sport?
FRANCOIS CARRARD The fight against doping is so difficult you can, indeed,
always try and do more. That's one of the dramas about doping. It's easy to
accuse the IOC. The IOC is only competent at the games. In between the
games many other organizations should do their work as well. The difficulty
is that you are always chasing the cheaters, the cheaters are getting
smarter and we are fighting and fighting very hard, contrary to what Mr
Leonard thinks, to lead.
FORREST SAWYER Gentlemen, I thank you both for a spirited discussion and
I'm sure we'll be discussing this again. Thank you.
FRANCOIS CARRARD Thank you.
JOHN LEONARD Thank you.
FORREST SAWYER We'll be back in just a moment.
(Commercial Break)
FORREST SAWYER That is our report for tonight. For the latest overnight
developments, watch Good Morning America tomorrow morning. I'm Forrest
Sawyer in Washington. For all of us here at ABC News, good night.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for July 2-8