------------------------------------------------------------------- Portland Crime Down, But Not Residents' Fears, Study Shows ('The Oregonian' Notes Its Fear-Mongering, Biased And Sensational Coverage Of Crime Issues Has Had The Desired Effect - The Biennial Survey Conducted In March By The Portland Firm, Campbell DeLong Resources Inc., Shows That Most Residents Have Not Been Victims Of Crime And Feel Safe In Their Neighborhoods, But They Continue To Call For Increased Police Patrols)The Oregonian letters to editor: email@example.com 1320 SW Broadway Portland, OR 97201 Web: http://www.oregonlive.com/ Portland crime down, but not residents' fears, study shows * A report finds 67% of those surveyed say violent crime isn't serious in their neighborhoods, down from 70% two years ago Thursday, August 27 1998 By Maxine Bernstein of The Oregonian staff Despite statistics that show violent crime has declined in Portland, residents' fear of crime has remained steady during the past four years. And although most residents have not been victims of crime and do feel safe in their neighborhoods, they continue to call for increased police patrols. Those findings of a survey conducted in March, which tracked perceptions of crime in the city and citizen involvement in public safety, were presented Wednesday to the City Council. Researchers from the Portland firm, Campbell DeLong Resources Inc., conducted the study, which has been done every two years since 1994. "I think holding steady is a good sign, considering the population increases, but the real goal is to have much more radical improvements," Portland Police Chief Charles Moose told the council. Afterward, Moose said, "And, certainly, we're working as hard as we can to get our staffing up, so there's no disagreement there." About 67 percent of the 1,250 randomly selected residents questioned this year said violent crimes -- such as shootings, assaults, and drug sales -- were not a serious problem in their neighborhoods. That is down slightly from two years ago, when 70 percent surveyed thought their neighborhoods were not plagued by violent crime. In 1994, 64 percent rated their neighborhoods safe from violent crime. In contrast, Portland Police Bureau statistics show that violent crimes -- murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault -- have decreased since 1994. Portland recorded a 10.7 percent drop in violent crimes in the first half of 1998, compared with the same period in 1997. In 1997, with Portland's population at 508,500, there were 7,615 violent crimes reported, compared with 8,831 violent crimes in 1994 when the city's population was 495,090, said Steve Beedle , the bureau's supervising crime analyst. Residents' perceptions of crime might not mirror the bureau's crime statistics partly because all crimes are not reported. "Perceptions are based on everything that you know -- whether it's reported or not," Beedle said. And at a time when the bureau has touted community-based policing to spur partnerships between police and residents, the survey found that fewer residents have been working with police or neighborhood groups to combat crime. Five percent of those surveyed this year had been involved in public safety activity, compared with 6 percent in 1996 and 7 percent in 1994. "We need to reinforce some of our efforts -- our block watches and problem-solving groups," Sharon McCormack , of the Office of Neighborhood Crime Prevention, told the council. "Many people still don't want to report crimes or don't have a good understanding of how they can be served by police." Because of a staffing shortage, neighborhood liaison officers were often pulled from regular assignments earlier this year to fill patrol beats. Moose said he has addressed that problem, and he explained that fewer people get involved with police when "things are good." But Leo Painton, president of the Portland police union, said the staffing shortage continues to prevent neighborhood officers from working closely with residents. There are 961 sworn officers, and the bureau is working to fill 85 vacancies before the end of the fiscal year, recruiter Jennifer Lawrence said.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Washington Supreme Court Says Knock And Talk No Good (The Text Of Today's Decision In State V. Ferrier, In Which The Court Reversed The Conviction Of A Bremerton Woman Accused Of Manufacturing A Plant, Ruling That The Victim Was Not Told By Police That She Had The Right To Refuse To Consent To A Search) Return-Path: (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: WA S Ct says Knock and Talk No Good Date: Fri, 28 Aug 98 08:53:22 -0700 Below is copy of opinion of State V. Ferrier decided yesterday by WA Supreme Court...Lookin' Good! Argued September 18, 1997. Decided August 27, 1998. STATE OF WASHINGTON, ) ) No. 64930-8 Respondent, ) ) v. ) En Banc ) DEBRA M. FERRIER, ) ) Petitioner. ) ) Filed August 27, 1998 Trial Court: Superior Court, Kitsap County County, No. 94-1-00154-8, James D. Roper, J. John P. Jensen, for petitioner. Pamela B. Loginsky, Kitsap County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent. ALEXANDER DURHAM, C.J., dissents by separate opinion. ALEXANDER, J. -- We granted Debra Ferrier's petition to review a Court of Appeals' decision affirming her conviction for manufacture of a controlled substance. At issue is the validity of a warrantless search of Ferrier's home by officers of the Bremerton Police Department. One of Ferrier's contentions is that the so-called "knock and talk" procedure employed by the police officers to obtain her consent to the search is violative of both the state and federal constitutions. She asserts, additionally, that she did not voluntarily consent to the search that was conducted by the police officers. We conclude that because Ferrier had heightened privacy rights in her home, as guaranteed by article I, section 7 of our state constitution, she should have been informed that she need not consent to the search. Because she was not, the search was unconstitutional and the evidence obtained as a result should not have been admitted into evidence. We, therefore, reverse her conviction. On April 19, 1993, two officers of the Bremerton Police Department received information from Ferrier's son, who was then in detention at the Youth Services Center in Port Orchard, that his mother was conducting a marijuana grow operation at her house in Bremerton. Because Ferrier's son had no record as an informant, the officers were unable to make any judgment about his credibility. They did, however, drive by the residence that was located at the address given to them by the youth and confirmed that a house matching the description given to them was at that location. Possessed only with the information Ferrier's son had provided to them and knowledge of the location of Ferrier's home, the officers met with two other Bremerton police officers at a "covert police department location" to discuss a procedure whereby they could gain entry to the home. Verbatim Report of Proceedings (VRP) (vol. II) at 151. At this meeting they hatched a plan to conduct a "knock and talk" because they believed that they could not obtain a search warrant without disclosing "the name of the informant, and we could do a knock and talk without doing that." VRP (vol. I) at 40. According to one of the police officers who testified at a suppression hearing, a knock and talk is a procedure like any other follow-up investigation that a detective or police officer would do. You go to the door, knock on the door, make contact with the resident, ask if you can come in to talk about whatever the complaint happens to be, which in this case there's a complaint of a marijuana grow. Once you're inside, you talk about why you're there and you ask for permission to search the premises. VRP (vol. I) at 24. The officer also testified that police officers have a high rate of success in getting home dwellers to consent to a search during a knock and talk. He indicated that "[v]irtually everybody allows you in. . . . I would say about half of them [knock and talks] were successful in terms of the fact that we found evidence of a crime." VRP (vol. I) at 26. At the conclusion of the meeting, the four police officers proceeded to Ferrier's residence. They were all armed and each wore a black "raid jacket" which had the word "police" emblazoned in yellow letters across the front and back. VRP (vol. I) at 28. Upon arriving at Ferrier's residence, two of the officers went to the back of the house in order to "secure the premises." VRP (vol. I) at 45-46. The others proceeded to the front entrance. The officers who initially went to the front door of Ferrier's home later testified at the suppression hearing that Ferrier opened the door in response to their knock. They said that they immediately identified themselves to Ferrier as police officers, whereupon she invited them into her house. Upon entering the front room of Ferrier's home, the officers noticed that there were two infant children in the room. According to both officers, they then radioed the officers at the rear of the home who responded by entering the dwelling. Upon their entry into the home, the 15-by 15-foot front room contained Ferrier, her two infant grandchildren and the four Bremerton police officers. According to all three officers who testified at the suppression hearing, Ferrier was told by them that they had information that a marijuana grow operation was being conducted in the house, and that they wanted to search the home and seize the marijuana. All of these officers indicated that Ferrier was then asked to consent to a search and that they went over a "consent to search" form with her before she signed it. The form did not indicate that she had the right to refuse consent to the search. The officers conceded that Ferrier was not told by them that she had the right to refuse to consent to a search, nor was she informed of any other rights. According to these officers, the consent form was signed by Ferrier within six or seven minutes after their entry into the home. Ferrier, according to two of the officers, eventually led them upstairs to a locked door, which she unlocked after retrieving a key. The officers then entered the previously locked room and proceeded to search it. One officer testified that Ferrier was crying during the time the police officers were searching the room. Another officer indicated that Ferrier appeared frightened and nervous throughout the entire time they were at the premises. Ferrier's testimony about the events leading to the search of her home varied in several respects from that of the police officers. She testified that when the officers were at her front door they said they wanted to talk to her about her son, and that they then "stepped into the house while they said that." VRP (vol. II) at 288. She also stated that "I was terrified. I was scared. They [the police officers] told me they were going to take my grandchildren to Child Protective Services." VRP (vol. II) at 261. Ferrier indicated that she only signed the consent to search form "[b]ecause I didn't want them to take my grandchildren away." VRP (vol. II) at 264. Ferrier confirmed that the police officers did not tell her that she could refuse to consent to a search nor did they inform her of any other rights. The search of the upstairs room resulted in the seizure of 29 mature marijuana plants, 39 starter plants, and other evidence of a marijuana grow operation. The police officers also seized $2,120 in cash from Ferrier's purse. Ferrier was thereafter charged in Kitsap County Superior Court with manufacturing a controlled substance. /1 Ferrier moved, pursuant to CrR 3.6(a), to suppress all of the evidence obtained as a result of the search of her home. Following a suppression hearing, the trial court denied her motion and entered findings of fact generally consistent with the State's version of the events leading to the seizure of the marijuana and other evidence. Ferrier and the State then entered into a stipulation as to the facts and submitted them to the trial court which, following Ferrier's waiver of a jury trial, found Ferrier guilty of the charged crime. Ferrier appealed the conviction to the Court of Appeals which affirmed. State v. Ferrier, No. 19280-2-II, slip. op. (Wash. Ct. App. Nov. 27, 1996). This court thereafter granted Ferrier's petition for review. /2 I. Ferrier contends that the knock and talk procedure, as employed here, is violative of her rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. /3 Thus, she argues, the consent to search given by her is vitiated. Because she cites no authority for her argument that her federal constitutional rights were violated, we are not obliged to consider the contention. /4 See State v. Lord, 117 Wn.2d 829, 853, 822 P.2d 177 (1991). In any case, the failure of the police to warn an individual of their right to refuse to consent to a warrantless search has previously been found to be merely a factor, and not necessarily dispositive, in assessing the voluntariness of the consent under a Fourth Amendment analysis. State v. Shoemaker, 85 Wn.2d 207, 212, 533 P.2d 123 (1975) (citing Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 93 S. Ct. 2041, 36 L. Ed. 2d 854 (1973); United States v. Heimforth, 493 F.2d 970 (9th Cir. 1974)). II. Ferrier's principal contention is that the knock and talk procedure as employed here violated her right to privacy granted by article I, section 7 of Washington's Constitution and thus invalidated the consent she gave to the officers to search her home. Because Ferrier engages in the independent analysis required by State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d 54, 61-62, 720 P.2d 808, 76 A.L.R.4th 517 (1986), we can consider her claim under our state constitution. State v. Wethered, 110 Wn.2d 466, 472-73, 755 P.2d 797 (1988). Article I, section 7 of our state's constitution provides that "[n]o person shall be disturbed in his private affairs, or his home invaded, without authority of law." This provision differs from the Fourth Amendment in that "[u]nlike the Fourth Amendment, Const. art. 1, sec. 7 `clearly recognizes an individual's right to privacy with no express limitations.'" State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 180, 867 P.2d 593 (1994) (emphasis added) (quoting State v. Simpson, 95 Wn.2d 170, 178, 622 P.2d 1199 (1980)). Nevertheless, in order to determine whether article I, section 7 provides greater protection for Ferrier's privacy interests under the present facts, we must apply the six nonexclusive criteria that were first identified in Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 58. Because this court is examining the same constitutional provision that was at issue in Gunwall, we merely adopt the analysis of factors one, two, three, and five that we undertook there. /5 See State v. Boland, 115 Wn.2d 571, 576, 800 P.2d 1112 (1990). Thus, we need examine only factors four and six to decide whether the knock and talk procedure, as employed here, ran afoul of Ferrier's state constitutional right to privacy. Even this examination need not be exhaustive because "[o]ur analysis of art. I, sec. 7 of the Washington Constitution begins with the proposition that warrantless searches are unreasonable per se." State v. Hendrickson, 129 Wn.2d 61, 70, 917 P.2d 563 (1996). While "consent" to a warrantless search is one of the "narrow exceptions" to the warrant requirement "[t]he burden rests with the State to prove" its presence. Hendrickson, 129 Wn.2d at 71. This is no easy task because "[t]he exceptions to the requirement of a warrant, including consent, are "`"jealously and carefully drawn."'" Hendrickson, 129 Wn.2d at 72 (quoting State v. Bradley, 105 Wn.2d 898, 902, 719 P.2d 546 (1986) (citing Coolidge v. New Hampshire, 403 U.S. 443, 454, 91 S. Ct. 2022, 29 L. Ed. 2d 120 (1971))). We look first to the fourth Gunwall factor, preexisting state law, Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 61-62, in order to determine the degree of privacy protection that Washington has historically afforded to individuals in similar situations. Numerous cases from this court have indicated that article I, section 7 goes further than the Fourth Amendment in protecting "against warrantless searches and seizures, with no express limitations" to this protection. City of Seattle v. Mesiani, 110 Wn.2d 454, 456, 755 P.2d 775 (1988) (citing Simpson, 95 Wn.2d at 178); see, e.g., Young, 123 Wn.2d at 188 (prohibiting warrantless infrared surveillance of home); Boland, 115 Wn.2d at 578 (prohibiting warrantless search of curbside trash); Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 63 (prohibiting the warrantless obtaining of phone records or installation of a pen register); State v. Chrisman, 100 Wn.2d 814, 818, 676 P.2d 419 (1984) (finding article I, section 7 violation in warrantless intrusion into student's dormitory room). Especially evident is the fact that "[i]n no area is a citizen more entitled to his privacy than in his or her home. For this reason, `the closer officers come to intrusion into a dwelling, the greater the constitutional protection.'" Young, 123 Wn.2d at 185 (citation omitted) (quoting Chrisman, 100 Wn.2d at 820). /6 In addition, our state Legislature has long provided protection against unlawful government intrusions into the home, making it a gross misdemeanor "for any policeman or other peace officer to enter and search any private dwelling house or place of residence without the authority of a search warrant issued upon a complaint as by law provided." RCW 10.79.040. We find that preexisting state law, the fourth Gunwall factor, amply supports independent review of this case under article I, section 7. We, therefore, next look to the sixth Gunwall factor, which requires us to examine whether the privacy interest at issue is a matter of particular state or local concern. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 62. Because of some overlap, the discussion under the fourth factor also applies here. See Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 67. Ferrier correctly cites Young for the proposition that the degree of privacy a Washington citizen has in the home is primarily a local concern, and that there is no need for national uniformity on this issue. Indeed, her argument that the privacy right at issue is local in nature finds support in this court's willingness, in other contexts, to forsake national uniformity by refusing to abandon our state's well-established protections against "unreasonable governmental intrusions." State v. Jackson, 102 Wn.2d 432, 443, 688 P.2d 136 (1984). However, the State cites two cases in arguing that "Washington courts that have considered whether a different standard of consent applies under Const. art. I, sec. 7, have rejected this contention." Supplemental Br. of Resp't at 13 (citing State v. McCrorey, 70 Wn. App 103, 108 n.3, 851 P.2d 1234, review denied, 122 Wn.2d 1013, 863 P.2d 73 (1993); State v. Williamson, 42 Wn. App. 208, 213, 710 P.2d 205 (1985), review denied, 105 Wn.2d 1012 (1986)). Both of these cases are distinguishable from the present, and not just because they predate our holding in Young concerning the protections afforded the home dweller. /7 To guide it in reaching its decision, Division One in McCrorey found only "precedent construing federal authority and not our own state constitution." McCrorey, 70 Wn. App. at 110. Because we had not yet spoken on whether a separate state constitutional analysis for voluntary consent applied under article I, section 7, Division One concluded that we were in lockstep with the federal rule on this issue. Williamson dealt with the standard of consent to search under the Fourth Amendment; in fact, that opinion did not even refer to article I, section 7. Thus the State's citation to Williamson in support of its argument is inexplicable. Furthermore, even where we have previously conducted only a Fourth Amendment analysis, we have found that one of three identified factors used in determining the "voluntariness of a consent to search" is "whether the consenting person had been advised of his right not to consent." Shoemaker, 85 Wn.2d at 212. Moreover, the State's response ignores the crux of Ferrier's challenge to the constitutionality of the procedure employed here. Ferrier does not argue that the voluntary standard of consent is unconstitutional under article I, section 7. The core of her argument is that the police here violated her expectation of privacy in her home because they conducted the knock and talk in order to search her home, thereby avoiding the general requirement that a search warrant be obtained. Indeed, Ferrier argues that the violation of her privacy right was one of the factors that made her eventual consent involuntary. This right is clearly an interest of local concern under the sixth Gunwall factor due to "[t]he heightened protection afforded state citizens against unlawful intrusion into private dwellings [that] places an onerous burden upon the government to show a compelling need to act outside of our warrant requirement." Chrisman, 100 Wn.2d at 822 (emphasis added). Having satisfied the need for an independent analysis, /8 we next consider whether the police violated the greater privacy protection provided by article I, section 7 in the manner in which they conducted this knock and talk procedure in an effort to obtain Ferrier's consent to search her home. It is significant to our analysis, in this regard, that it is undisputed that Ferrier was in her home when the police initiated contact with her. In addition, the officers admitted that they conducted the knock and talk in order to avoid the necessity of obtaining a search warrant authorizing a search of the home. This, especially, flies in the face of our previous admonition that "`[w]here the police have ample opportunity to obtain a warrant, we do not look kindly on their failure to do so.'" State v. Leach, 113 Wn.2d 735, 744, 782 P.2d 1035 (1989) (quoting approvingly from United States v. Impink, 728 F.2d 1228, 1231 (9th Cir. 1984)). Finally, and most importantly, the officers concede that they did not advise Ferrier that she had the right to refuse to consent to a search of her home. Based on these facts, all of which were found by the trial court, we conclude that the knock and talk, as carried out here, violated Ferrier's state constitutional right to privacy in her home and, thus, vitiated the consent she gave. This is so because she was not advised, prior to giving her consent to the search of her home, that she could refuse to consent. Central to our holding is our belief that any knock and talk is inherently coercive to some degree. While not every knock and talk effort may be accompanied by as great a show of force as was present here, we believe that the great majority of home dwellers confronted by police officers on their doorstep or in their home would not question the absence of a search warrant because they either (1) would not know that a warrant is required; (2) would feel inhibited from requesting its production, even if they knew of the warrant requirement; or (3) would simply be too stunned by the circumstances to make a reasoned decision about whether or not to consent to a warrantless search. In this context, Ferrier's testimony, which was supported by the officers, that she was afraid and nervous seems totally reasonable. Indeed, we are not surprised that, as noted earlier, an officer testified that virtually everyone confronted by a knock and talk accedes to the request to permit a search of their home. We wish to emphasize that we are not entirely disapproving of the knock and talk procedure, and we understand that its coercive effects are not altogether avoidable. They can, however, be mitigated by requiring officers who conduct the procedure to warn home dwellers of their right to refuse consent to a warrantless search. This would provide greater protection for privacy rights that are protected by the state constitution and would also accord with the state's Fourth Amendment burden of demonstrating, by clear and convincing evidence, that consent to a search was voluntarily given. State v. Smith, 115 Wn.2d 775, 789, 801 P.2d 975 (1990) (citing Shoemaker, 87 Wn.2d at 210; State v. Nelson, 47 Wn. App. 157, 163, 734 P.2d 516 (1987)). Our decision is also consistent with that of the New Jersey Supreme Court, which has held under article I, paragraph 7 of its state constitution that "where the State seeks to justify a search on the basis of consent it has the burden of showing that the consent was voluntary, an essential element of which is knowledge of the right to refuse consent." /9 State v. Johnson, 68 N.J. 349, 346 A.2d 66, 68 (1975) (emphasis added). We would simply go further to state the obvious -- that the only sure way to give such a protection substance is to require a warning of its existence. If we were to reach any other conclusion, we would not be satisfied that a home dweller who consents to a warrantless search possessed the knowledge necessary to make an informed decision. That being the case, the State would be unable to meet its burden of proving that a knowing and voluntary waiver occurred. As the United States Supreme Court has noted in another context: "For those unaware of the privilege, the warning is needed simply to make them aware of it -- the threshold requirement for an intelligent decision as to its exercise." Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 468, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694, 10 A.L.R.3d 974 (1965). After all, "[a]ssessments of the knowledge that the defendant possessed . . . can never be more than speculation; a warning is a clearcut fact." Miranda, 384 U.S. at 468-69 (footnote omitted). In reaching the conclusion we reach here, we are aware that an argument could be made that the rule we adopt today may be somewhat redundant because an officer's request for consent to search already implies that one has the right to refuse that request. That argument is unpersuasive and self-defeating. If we assume that the right to refuse consent is implicit in the request made by the police, then there is no harm in requiring them to explicitly inform the home dweller of that fact. Furthermore, we do not believe that requiring police officers to inform residents of their right to refuse consent to the search will seriously impede the ability of the police to use the knock and talk as an investigative tool, considering that there are many cases where a suspect consented to the search after being informed of the right to refuse consent. See, e.g., State v. Stenson, 132 Wn.2d 668, 697, 940 P.2d 1239 (1997) (defendant signed a written consent to search that contained "a clear statement that the Defendant had `the lawful right to refuse to consent to such a search.'") (emphasis added), cert. denied, 118 S. Ct. 1193 (1998); Smith, 115 Wn.2d at 790 (defendant "signed a written consent to the search which included specific language that documented his right to refuse consent.") (emphasis added); cf. Paul G. Cassell & Bret S. Hayman, Police Interrogation in the 1990s: An Empirical Study of the Effects of Miranda, 43 U.C.L.A. L. Rev. 839, 859 (1996) (reporting study showing that 83.7 percent of all criminal suspects waived their Miranda rights). We believe that the expectation of privacy in the home is clearly "one which a citizen of this state should be entitled to hold," City of Seattle v. McCready, 123 Wn.2d 260, 270, 868 P.2d 134 (1994), because "the home receives heightened constitutional protection." Young, 123 Wn.2d at 185. In light of the importance that we attach to that right in Washington, we are satisfied that public policy supports adoption of a rule that article I, section 7 is violated whenever the authorities' fail to inform home dwellers of their right to refuse consent to a warrantless search. After all, as we noted earlier, we have already held that the failure to warn is a factor to be employed in assessing the voluntariness of consent under the more permissive Fourth Amendment standard. See Shoemaker, 85 Wn.2d at 212. In our judgment, further protection for individuals in their home is necessary because, unlike a search warrant, a search resulting from a knock and talk need not be supported by probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion, and the constitutionality of the search might otherwise only be reviewed, if ever, months after the search was conducted at an optional CrR 3.6 suppression hearing. Moreover, unlike a search based upon a warrant, the scope of a consensual search is often not limited to specific areas. See 3 Wayne R. LaFave, Search and Seizure sec. 8.1, at 596-97 (3d ed. 1996). While we recognize that a home dweller should be permitted to voluntarily consent to a search of his or her home, the waiver of the right to require production of a warrant must, in the final analysis, be the product of an informed decision. We, therefore, adopt the following rule: that when police officers conduct a knock and talk for the purpose of obtaining consent to search a home, and thereby avoid the necessity of obtaining a warrant, they must, prior to entering the home, inform the person from whom consent is sought that he or she may lawfully refuse to consent to the search and that they can revoke, at any time, the consent that they give, and can limit the scope of the consent to certain areas of the home. The failure to provide these warnings, prior to entering the home, vitiates any consent given thereafter. /10 In light of our holding that the knock and talk procedure involved here was unconstitutional, we need not address Ferrier's argument that what followed, her consent to the search of her home, was involuntarily given. Finally, we have previously held that "[w]ithout an immediate application of the exclusionary rule whenever an individual's right to privacy is unreasonably invaded, the protections of the Fourth Amendment and Const. art 1, sec. 7 are seriously eroded." State v. White, 97 Wn.2d 92, 111-12, 640 P.2d 1061 (1982). Accordingly, we conclude that the trial court erred in failing to suppress the evidence obtained in the unlawful search of Ferrier's home. Ferrier's conviction is, therefore, reversed. SMITH, JOHNSON, MADSEN, TALMADGE and SANDERS, JJ., concur. *** 1 RCW 69.50.401(a) provides in pertinent part: "(a) Except as authorized by this chapter, it is unlawful for any person to manufacture . . . a controlled substance." 2 Ferrier also raised double jeopardy and right to counsel issues at the Court of Appeals. She did not, however, raise these issues in her petition to this court. 3 The Fourth Amendment provides: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause . . . ." 4 Regardless, "to apply the federal constitution before the Washington Constitution would be as improper and premature as deciding a case on state constitutional grounds when statutory grounds would have sufficed, and for essentially the same reasons." State v. Coe, 101 Wn.2d 364, 374, 679 P.2d 353 (1984). 5 Those factors are: (1) the state constitution's textual language; (2) significant textual differences between parallel state and federal constitutional provisions; (3) state constitutional and common law history; and (5) structural differences between the state and federal constitutions. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 61-62. 6 We can find a historical antecedent for this principle in a passage quoted in Miller v. United States, 357 U.S. 301, 307, 78 S. Ct. 1190, 2 L. Ed. 2d 1332 (1958), from a speech given in 1763 by William Pitt, the Earl of Chatham, during a debate in Parliament: "`The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail; its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the King of England cannot enter -- all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!'" 7 In Young we held that "in examining our state constitution's explicit protection of the home, the fact the search occurs at a home is central to the analysis." Young, 123 Wn.2d at 185 n.2. 8 The dissent contends that "we have already determined that federal precedent controls in evaluating consent cases under article I, section 7." Dissenting op. at 2. Cited in support of this proposition are "common authority to consent to a search of a home" cases such as State v. Leach, 113 Wn.2d 735, 782 P.2d 1035 (1989). Dissenting op. at 2. We disagree with that contention. The question there was who can provide consent, not whether consent was voluntarily given. See Leach, 113 Wn.2d 735. Our holding here is in no way contrary to Leach. The dissent's more serious criticism of our holding is that "in a case very closely on point, we utilized an exclusively Fourth Amendment analysis to resolve an article I, section 7 challenge to the voluntariness of a person's consent to search his home." Dissenting op. at 2-3 (citing McNear v. Rhay, 65 Wn.2d 530, 534, 536-38, 398 P.2d 732 (1965)). McNear is inapplicable here, though. Not only does it predate Gunwall, but it even predates this court's first real articulation of the differences between the Fourth Amendment and article I, section 7. See State v. Simpson, 95 Wn.2d 170, 177-78, 622 P.2d 1199 (1980). Article I, section 7 jurisprudence simply cannot be frozen in time as of 1965. "[T]he constitution was not intended to be a static document incapable of coping with changing times. It was meant to be, and is, a living document with current effectiveness." Seattle School Dist. No. 1 v. State, 90 Wn.2d 476, 517, 585 P.2d 71 (1978). McNear does mention, in passing, the defendant's assertions that article I, section 7, along with various other federal and constitutional rights, was violated. See McNear, 65 Wn.2d at 534-35. However, it does not disclose any effort at independent analysis of article I, section 7. Indeed, after this court's sparse summary of the defendant's assertions McNear never again mentions article I, section 7. Mere silence cannot signal the adoption, forevermore, of a Fourth Amendment voluntary consent analysis. Accordingly, the dissent is left in the unsupported position of being unable to deny that a search of a home is governed by article I, section 7, but arguing that consent to that same search is somehow governed by the Fourth Amendment alone. 9 This decision was remarkable inasmuch as the court noted that New Jersey's article I, paragraph 7 (quite unlike Washington's article I, section 7) "is taken almost verbatim from the Fourth Amendment and until now has not been held to impose higher or different standards than those called for by the Fourth Amendment." Johnson, 346 A.2d at 68 n.2. In contrast, we are faced with a clearer imperative. 10 Although the police procedure involved here was constitutionally infirm, the general use of a "consent to search" form, such as the one signed by Ferrier and the ones found in Stenson and Smith, carries with it the advantage of creating evidence that avoids ambiguity over whether consent was actually given. Aug. 1998 STATE v. FERRIER (dissent) 1 Cause No. 64930-8 DURHAM DURHAM, C.J. (dissenting) -- The majority holds that, under article I, section 7 of our state constitution, a person's consent to search his or her home is invalid unless the police expressly inform that person of the right to refuse consent. Because there is no basis for such a rule under our case law, I respectfully dissent. Ms. Ferrier challenges the validity of her consent under both article I, section 7 of the Washington State Constitution and the fourth amendment to the United States Constitution. The majority observes that this court will resort to independent state constitutional grounds rather than deferring to comparable federal constitutional provisions only when warranted in light of the Gunwall /1 factors. Majority at 9. Given our extensive prior evaluation of article I, section 7 in light of the Gunwall factors, the majority focuses the inquiry on the degree of privacy protection our preexisting state law "has historically afforded to individuals in similar situations." Majority at 11. Yet, in justifying a separate state constitutional analysis, the majority fails to cite a single article I, section 7 case involving consent to search a home. Instead, the majority demonstrates only that this court has historically afforded broader state privacy rights against infrared surveillance and against searches of curbside trash, phone records, and dormitory rooms. /2 Were we without any cases more closely on point, these cases might be sufficiently "similar situations" because of the common element of the home. However, we have already determined that federal precedent controls in evaluating consent cases under article I, section 7. For example, we have expressly adopted federal precedent as determinative in article I, section 7 cases regarding the common authority to consent to search of a home. See State v. Mathe, 102 Wn.2d 537, 543, 688 P.2d 859 (1984) (adopting United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164, 94 S. Ct. 988, 39 L. Ed. 2d 242 (1974) "as the proper guide to determine test questions of consent issues under Const. art. I, sec. 7"); State v. Leach, 113 Wn.2d 735, 739, 782 P.2d 1035 (1989) ("This court has expressly adopted the Matlock standard for determining issues of consent under Const. art. 1, sec. 7.")). And, in a case very closely on point, we utilized an exclusively Fourth Amendment analysis to resolve an article I, section 7 challenge to the voluntariness of a person's consent to search his home. McNear v. Rhay, 65 Wn.2d 530, 534, 536-38, 398 P.2d 732 (1965). Thus, our preexisting case law suggests that Fourth Amendment analysis is appropriate in evaluating the validity of consent to search a home under article I, section 7. Under the Fourth Amendment, the voluntariness of consent to search is a question of fact to be determined by considering the totality of circumstances surrounding the consent. State v. Smith, 115 Wn.2d 775, 801 P.2d 975 (1990). Factors to be considered include whether Miranda warnings had been given prior to obtaining consent, the degree of education and intelligence of the consenting person, and whether the consenting person had been advised of the right not to consent. Smith, 115 Wn.2d at 789; State v. Shoemaker, 85 Wn.2d 207, 212, 533 P.2d 123 (1975). The Courts of Appeals have also considered (1) whether the police made any express or implied claims of authority to search or enter; (2) previous illegal actions of the police; (3) the defendant's degree of cooperation; and (4) police deception as to identity or purpose. State v. McCrorey, 70 Wn. App. 103, 112, 851 P.2d 1234, review denied, 122 Wn.2d 1013 (1993); State v. Flowers, 57 Wn. App. 636, 645, 789 P.2d 333, review denied, 115 Wn.2d 1990 (1990). In the present case, the police did not give Miranda warnings and did not expressly inform Ms. Ferrier that she could refuse consent; but Ms. Ferrier had completed the 11th grade, the police did not claim authority to search or enter, the court found that Ms. Ferrier had cooperated with the police, and there was no indication of police deception or illegal activity. Indeed, the police made clear from the beginning that they wanted permission to search for illegal drug activity and that the fruits of the search would be used against her in court. Under these circumstances, Ms. Ferrier's consent was voluntary and the seized evidence was properly admitted at trial. I would affirm. GUY, J., concurs with DURHAM, C.J. *** 1 State v. Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d 54, 720 P.2d 808, 76 A.L.R.4th 517 (1986). 2 Majority at 11-12 (citing State v. Young, 123 Wn.2d 173, 188, 867 P.2d 593 (1994); State v. Boland, 115 Wn.2d 571, 578, 800 P.2d 1112 (1990); Gunwall, 106 Wn.2d at 63; State v. Chrisman, 100 Wn.2d 814, 818, 676 P.2d 419 (1984)).
------------------------------------------------------------------- Media Oversight Council Formed ('The Seattle Times' Optimistically Says Journalists Vie With Lawyers For Rock-Bottom Ranking On The Scale Of Public Trust, So It's A Good Time To Start An Organization To Consider Complaints Against The Media, And 'The Seattle Times' Will Support John Hamer, Founder Of The Counterpoint Center For ReMEDIAtion, A Conservative Media Watchdog Group, Who Has Rounded Up An All-Star Group Of Public And Private Citizens To Serve On The Board Of The Fledgling Washington News Council - One Remembers When 'The Oregonian' Set Up A Similar Group In The 1980s, Only To Ignore It) From: "W.H.E.N. - Bob Owen" (email@example.com) To: "-Hemp Talk" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: HT: WA Media oversight council formed Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:08:45 -0700 Sender: email@example.com We should keep in contact with this council. They should be on our side if the giva a crap about the truth. Bob_O *** Copyright (c) 1998 The Seattle Times Company Posted at 07:03 a.m. PDT; Thursday, August 27, 1998 Media oversight council formed by Carol M. Ostrom Seattle Times staff reporter Columnists who make up characters, a front-page apology to an offended multinational corporation, libel judgments against television news shows. Across the nation, journalists vie with lawyers for rock-bottom ranking on the scale of public trust. It's a good time to start an organization to consider complaints against the media, believes John Hamer, founder of the CounterPoint Center for ReMEDIAtion, a conservative media watchdog group. Mike Fancher, executive editor of The Seattle Times, agrees. "If there has ever been a time to do this, this is it," said Fancher. Hamer has rounded up an all-star group of public and private citizens to serve on the board of the fledgling Washington News Council. Fancher, who is not on the council, and Hamer say they want fair, honest evaluation of the news media, public involvement and education, and an independent forum where the public can bring its complaints. But can public figures whose own actions have been criticized by the media be fair in their evaluations? "I think several of (the board members) have been the subject of press scrutiny," Fancher noted. "One wonders what the motivation is for some of those individuals." Fancher said he supports the concept of a news council and independent evaluation of the media "if it's a good-faith effort to improve journalism. And I hope that's what this is." But he added that Hamer's criticisms of the media in the past often have appeared to be motivated by a political agenda. "John has become such an ideologue and so self-serving in his criticism of the press it's shameful. So that concerns me," said Fancher. Hamer responded: "I think that's an unfair characterization. My criticisms of the press certainly have been from a conservative point of view because I feel, and continue to feel, that that's one of the criticisms of the press." Hamer, a former Times editorial writer who now has a column in the Seattle Weekly, said he chose board members for the new council from a wide political and ideological spectrum, zeroing in on "blue-ribbon, respected" people who would give the organization balance and credibility. "It cannot be seen as an organization with an ax to grind, a point of view that it is `going after' the media," he said. Board members include politicians from both parties, business and labor leaders, as well as former media executives. The board eventually will be expanded to include citizens from around the state, Hamer said. Among the members are former Seattle mayor and television reporter Charles Royer, former Governor Mike Lowry, conservative activist Pat Herbold, former University of Washington President Bill Gerberding, former state Senate Majority Leader Jeannette Hayner, Washington State Convention and Trade Center Chairman Jim Ellis and philanthropist Patsy Bullitt Collins. As governor, Lowry received critical media scrutiny for proposing a tax increase immediately after winning election and for allegations of sexual harassment against him by a staffer in his administration. But yesterday Lowry said he wasn't interested in criticizing the news media's treatment of him. In general, the credibility of the media is essential for democracy to operate effectively, he said. "I think many people in the media are very concerned about the credibility of the media," Lowry said. "Some of the leaders in the media are the ones I've heard doing the most talking about the need to do this." Hamer said he thinks the council can help restore trust in the media. The model for Hamer's concept is the Minnesota News Council, an independent organization that has operated for nearly 30 years. With a panel of 24 voting members - half journalists and half non-journalists - the group mediates complaints from the public. It also conducts public forums, produces a cable-television show on ethics and holds workshops for news organizations to help them avoid "the kinds of lapses that lead to complaints," said Gary Gilson, the group's executive director. In 28 years, half the complaints have been decided for the news organizations and half against, Gilson said. A council vote carries with it no sanctions, although the organization asks the news media to cover the decision. In recent years, the Minnesota News Council has taken on a number of high-profile cases. One involved a 17-year-old incest victim who was identified in a newspaper story when her father was convicted of the crime. The newspaper maintained that it merely had reported what was in the court record and that to do anything less would have abandoned the "whole truth" standard. The council, Gilson said, concluded that the paper had been insensitive. In another case, a lengthy feature story on an unmarried young black mother resulted in a complaint by a community group that the paper had perpetuated a stereotype. In that case, the council supported the newspaper. But the newspaper decided, after listening to testimony, that it needed to work at covering communities of color and launched an effort to improve, Gilson said. "You don't need a news council at all if news organizations figure out ways to make themselves open to questions and complaints," he said. "The problem is that most news organizations have not created systems for handling complaints. They have systems to handle complaints from advertisers and subscribers, but not from readers or viewers." Carol M. Ostrom's phone message number is 206-464-2249. Her e-mail address is: firstname.lastname@example.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- Trial May Shed Light On Demise Of 'Safer' Cigarette ('The Los Angeles Times' Says The First Of Several Tobacco Industry Lawyers Who Will Begin Cooperating With Antitobacco Plaintiffs Will Be Lawrence G. Meyer, A Former Outside Counsel To The Liggett Group Inc. Who Has Agreed To Testify For The State Of Washington When Its Civil Lawsuit Starts September 14 - His Testimony Is Sure To Revive The 20-Year-Old History Of The Death Of The 'XA' Project, Which Involved The Blending Of A Catalyst With Tobacco To Neutralize Cancer-Causing Compounds In Cigarette Smoke) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:32:21 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US CA: Trial May Shed Light On Demise Of 'Safer' Cigarette Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.latimes.com/ Pubdate: 27 August 1998 Author: MYRON LEVIN, Times Staff Writer TRIAL MAY SHED LIGHT ON DEMISE OF 'SAFER' CIGARETTE Courts: Ex-industry lawyer is expected to testify about 'XA' project. Liggett Group once saw product as savior. Of all the accusations being hurled at tobacco companies, none is more damning than the charge that they colluded to squelch development of "safer" cigarettes, fixating on avoiding legal liability rather than customers' welfare. Cigarette makers have hotly denied the claim. But the line of attack could get a significant boost from new evidence on the demise of a supposedly safer smoke that struggling Liggett Group Inc. once viewed as a breakthrough against lung cancer and the salvation of its dying business. In the first case of an industry lawyer cooperating with antitobacco plaintiffs, Lawrence G. Meyer, former outside counsel to Liggett, has agreed to testify for the state of Washington at its trial, scheduled to start Sept. 14. His testimony is sure to rekindle a 20-year-old mystery concerning the death of the "XA" project, which involved the blending of a catalyst with tobacco to neutralize cancer-causing compounds in the smoke. Meyer, a 57-year-old Washington, D.C., attorney, also is expected to be debriefed by lawyers for the three dozen other states with pending antitobacco suits, and by Justice Department investigators involved in a criminal probe of Big Tobacco. Nor is Meyer the only knowledgeable insider who has not been heard from yet. Another who has not been contacted by the states is J. Bowen Ross Jr., a former Liggett patent lawyer who recently gave The Times copies of his notes from more than 100 meetings on the XA project between 1976 and 1983. Ross, 60, who said he has had three relatives die of lung cancer from smoking, believes Liggett blew a big opportunity--and not just because it "would have made a lot of money . . . I thought if you came out with something that's beneficial, you have an obligation" to bring it to market. Mild Sensation Soon Fizzles The XA affair created a mild sensation in 1988 when it was first revealed in a New Jersey tobacco case. Amid charges and denials, the story soon faded into the mists. But now Washington and other states--whose lawsuits, among other things, charge cigarette makers with conspiring to not compete on product safety--are beginning to dig deeper. Meyer was a partner in the law firm of Patton, Boggs & Blow, and an outside lawyer for Liggett from 1974-86. He advised the firm in its dealings with federal agencies, and at times represented Liggett on the Committee of Counsel, where top industry lawyers plotted legal and regulatory strategy. Meyer also attended some of Liggett's meetings on the XA project. At one such meeting, Ross said, Meyer made this statement that appears in Ross' notes: "Other tobacco companies will look upon this [the XA] as a catastrophic event." Lawyers for Washington first contacted Meyer in May. His cooperation would have been impossible but for the landmark out-of-court settlement Liggett reached last year with Washington and other states. In return for dismissal from their lawsuits, the financially wobbly firm agreed to help them gather evidence against its larger rivals. Under the agreement, Liggett had to waive attorney-client privilege to allow Meyer to testify. Other tobacco companies are seeking to limit the scope of Meyer's testimony. However, his recollections are outlined in a document filed by his lawyer, Dwight P. Bostwick, this month in state court in Seattle. The 10-page proffer alludes to the pivotal role of Joseph Greer--former general counsel of Liggett's tobacco division--in scrubbing the XA. Greer, a smoker who died of lung cancer in 1985 and was a close friend of Meyer's, was under pressure from Liggett defense lawyers, who thought the XA would undermine their defense of smoking and health cases, the proffer states. It says Greer also was leaned on "by other tobacco companies," which feared that "Liggett's marketing and sale of a safe cigarette could result in infinite liability in civil litigation as it would constitute a direct or implied admission that all other cigarettes were unsafe." A tobacco industry lawyer said he could not comment until Meyer testifies. But cigarette makers have always rejected claims that they ignored health concerns, arguing that they have gradually lowered tar and nicotine yields and invested millions trying to come up with novel new brands. "Is there a silver bullet for cigarette design?" industry lawyer David Bernick asked jurors earlier this year at the state of Minnesota's big tobacco trial. "Nobody's told us about it. We've spent a hell of a lot of money trying to find it. We can't." Costly Failure of Effort Cited The costly failure of R.J. Reynolds' Premier brand in the late 1980s is an oft-cited example of the industry's efforts. Premier heated, rather than burned, tobacco and appeared to lower risks from smoking and from secondhand smoke. After bombing in test markets it was canceled. But there also is evidence the industry took a dim view of such efforts and the potential legal fallout. In 1987, for example, a lawyer for Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Big Tobacco's leading courtroom defenders, noted with alarm that Premier could prove injurious to "the tobacco industry's joint defense efforts." "The industry position has always been that there is no alternative design for a cigarette as we know them," wrote the lawyer, William S. Ohlemeyer. "Unfortunately, the Reynolds announcement . . . seriously undercuts this component of industry's defense." Liggett, smallest and weakest of the companies, was tormented by such fears as it planned the launch of its new product, documents and interviews show. The XA evolved from bombshell research that triggered the country's first big cancer scare. In 1953, researchers announced they had produced cancerous tumors on the backs of mice by daubing their skin with liquid condensate, or 'tar,' from cigarette smoke. The industry generally sought to belittle the study, arguing tests on mice had no relevance to human lungs. But Liggett, something of a maverick even then, secretly decided to replicate the work. The company hired scientists from the consulting firm of Arthur D. Little who validated the findings through their own skin painting tests. But that was just the beginning. The idea was "to do something about changing cigarettes if it were true that [cigarettes] do cause cancer," according to a 1954 memo. Over the years, Liggett spent more than $15 million and tested more than 200 additives in search of one that might blunt the carcinogenic effects of smoke. Eventually, researchers found that trace amounts of palladium--a metal used in automobile catalytic converters--and magnesium nitrate blended with tobacco would destroy a group of compounds known as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. The result was that in skin painting tests, cancerous tumors were reduced by up to 100%. When Liggett obtained the first of several patents in 1977, the timing seemed perfect. Liggett's sales were sinking fast, and it was desperate for a way to right the ship. Once an industry giant with more than 20% of the market, Liggett was stuck with tired brands and a market share under 3%. Ross' meeting notes show the company thought the XA could quickly grab a 2% market share, or about 12 billion cigarettes. Preparations were so serious that Liggett purchased huge inventories of palladium. Once, when a truckload arrived at Liggett's Durham, N.C., plant during a strike by Liggett workers, the 55-gallon drums were trucked late at night to Ross' home and rolled into his basement. Obstacles to Marketing Brand But there were obstacles. In the marketing arena, the challenge was in touting a safer cigarette without making health claims that would draw the ire of the Federal Trade Commission. Indeed, the XA did nothing to counter heart disease or emphysema. And while mouse skin painting had become standard, the XA's favorable data was not solid proof of benefit to smokers' lungs. This gave XA foes great ammunition: Why take the legal risks, they asked, if the XA could not be properly promoted? But documents and testimony suggest this was less a reason than an excuse. "Whenever any problem came up . . . the legal department would pounce upon that in an attempt to kill the project," said former Liggett scientist James D. Mold, whose deposition in 1988 first brought the episode to light. In a 1977 memo in which Greer voiced his staunch opposition to the XA, he noted that Liggett in defending itself in court had always debunked the mouse skin tests. To launch a brand whose superiority was based on those very tests could be disastrous, Greer argued. The company would be "taking enormous risks in the defense of governmental actions and civil litigation with its attending subjection to vast amounts of monetary liability," Greer wrote. Greer earlier had taken the precaution of ordering that a lawyer (often Ross) be present for all XA meetings, with all notes to be collected by the law department so the firm could assert attorney-client privilege and refuse to produce them in court. Ross recalled being on an out-of-town trip when Greer ordered company officials to ignore an impending deadline for paying the negligible fee for issuance of an XA patent. "I went ballistic," Ross recalled--adding that he got Greer to relent by raising the specter of stockholders suing over the wasting of corporate assets. Greer also interfered with a strategy Liggett officials had devised to cope with the marketing problem, documents and testimony show. In October 1978, Mold and Charles Kensler of Arthur D. Little flew to Buenos Aires for the 12th International Cancer Congress, hoping to drum up publicity for the XA. They believed the scientific press would seize on the news, and the popular press would pick it up from there. As they prepared to stage a press conference, Mold recalled getting "a frantic call from Mr. Greer" with orders to not distribute "the press release and not hold a press conference, that they had changed their mind." According to the Meyer proffer, Greer feared that if "Mold went forward with his comments at the Buenos Aires conference, the world press would report on the attendant scientific advances . . . and, thereafter, Liggett would not have the option of abandoning the project," the document states. Liggett's peril, according to Ross' rough notes, was thus twofold. The XA could increase "potential [liability] for existing products." But "if withheld, conspiracy," and "nonuse of valuable asset to public good," his notes said. Retribution Claim Is Denied Mold said Liggett President K.V. Dey Jr. told him in 1981 that a Philip Morris executive had vowed unspecified retribution if the XA were launched. "They would not sit back and allow us to market this without creating problems," Mold said. Dey denied there were such threats. Nonetheless, Liggett decided to avoid the U.S. and seek licensing deals with foreign manufacturers. If the XA succeeded overseas, they might then bring it home. Mold, Ross and another Liggett executive pitched cigarette makers in France, Austria, Germany and Russia--but found no takers. Mold, who left Liggett in 1984, said the effort was doomed from the start. In essence, Liggett told the Europeans, "This is a great product but we're not going to produce it," Mold recently told The Times. The obvious question, he said, was, "If it's that great, why aren't you going to produce it?" Copyright 1998 Los Angeles Times. All Rights Reserved
------------------------------------------------------------------- Let's Jump On The Ban Wagon (The Shredder, A Columnist For The Luis Obispo County, California 'New Times,' Heaps Some Hilarious Scorn On City Officials In Atascadero Who Passed A Municipal Ban On Medical Marijuana Clubs)Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 06:22:48 -0400 (EDT) From: Jo-D (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: DPFCA (DPFCA@drugsense.org) Subject: DPFCA: Let's Jump on the Ban Wagon Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/ Newshawk: Jo-D Harrison Source: New Times (CA) SLO County's News and Entertainment Weekly Contact: email@example.com Website: http://newtimes-slo.com/ Pubdate: Thursday, August 27 - September 3, 1998 Section: The Shredder, page 9 Let's Jump on the Ban Wagon Poor Atascadero. The sleepy city got caught unawares when big bad porn king Steve Diamond arrived with his naughty toys-for-tarts store. Atascadero didn't have a law in place regulating businesses for grown-ups, so they couldn't find a way to keep the guy out. Now Atascadero has to endure the indignity of consumers from all over the county driving there to spend money on something they can't get anywhere else. It's a city's worst nightmare. I guess Atascadero wants to make damn sure nothing like that ever happens again, so they've got their legal beagles drafting bans on every nasty thing you can imagine, beginning with cannabis buyers clubs. Sick people getting together to medicate themselves with a natural herb that deadens pain, reduces nausea, and increases appetite? Yuck! Not in our town. Personally, I like Atascadero's new proactive stance. For one thing, it gives city officials an opportunity to use the superhip '90s term "proactive." Just listen to Police Chief Dennis Hegwood: "It's an issue that needs to be addressed, and we need to be proactive." Dennis gets a gold star. After all, banning things proactively is a lot easier than banning them when they're around to defend themselves. I'll even volunteer to help Atascadero's legal team, because they've got their work cut out for them. Let's start with some other dubious things that slipped into Atascadero while the city slept: Maybe they should ban doctor's offices. All kinds of sickos suffering from God knows what are taking all manner of nasty drugs in those dens of iniquity. Ban 'em, sez I! How about a ban on police chiefs who resigned from their last assignment after receiving a vote of no confidence from the officers they supervised? Hegwood slipped under the wire, of course, but we can certainly prevent this from ever happening again. And let's ban government officials who kick teenagers out of public parks, but bend over for every megaconglomerate corporation that wants to park its big-box backside along that hideous unofficial strip mall that lines the highway from one side of town to the other, and who give golf course developers carte blanche to change their plans after they've been approved and stick up a bunch of megawattage lights to shine into their neighbors' homes. And while we're at it, we should probably ban cities that were founded by felons. It's not Atascadero's fault that E.G. Lewis founded the town, tried to keep out minorities, and then went to prison for fraud. It's just that when he arrived, Atascadero didn't have an ordinance in place to prevent such things. Just goes to show.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Venice High To Get Drug-Sniffing Dogs ('The Los Angeles Times' Says The Los Angeles School Board Approved A Plan Tuesday To Bring Drug-Sniffing Dogs Into Venice High School To Check Students' Backpacks, Lockers And Desks, The First Time Canines Will Be Used On Campus In The Los Angeles Unified School District - The Campaign For The $2,500 One-Year Pilot Project Was Spearheaded By Venice High Parent Claudia Border)Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 15:21:38 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: Venice High to Get Drug-Sniffing Dogs Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Fax: 213-237-4712 Website: http://www.latimes.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Author: Jessica Garrison VENICE HIGH TO GET DRUG-SNIFFING DOGS Campus will be first in Los Angeles school district to have canines sniff backpacks, lockers and desks. School board OKs one-year pilot program. VENICE -- The Los Angeles school board has approved a plan to bring drug-sniffing dogs into Venice High School to check students' backpacks, lockers and desks. It is the first time canines will be used on campus in the Los Angeles Unified School District. "We are very pleased that we got the green light to proceed," said Venice High Principal Bud Jacobs. He said he doesn't think the school has any more of a drug problem than other schools, but that the dogs will be "a very strong deterrent." "What we are shooting for is zero presence of drugs," Jacobs said. The $2,500 one-year pilot project approved Tuesday was spearheaded by Venice High parent Claudia Border, who serves on the school's LEARN reform committee. A dog and its handler will show up at school unannounced and sniff out drugs and gunpowder in backpacks, desks, lockers and cars. The dogs will not sniff students, who will leave the classroom before the dog enters. Jacobs said the school will hold several assemblies for students and parents after school opens Sept. 8 to introduce the dogs. Although Jacobs said he believes most students and parents support the plan, at least one parent has contacted the American Civil Liberties Union regarding the legality of bringing the canines on campus. ACLU officials declined to take the case, but did say they might be willing to get involved if they believe school officials are violating students' civil rights in implementing the program. Copyright 1998 Los Angeles Times.
------------------------------------------------------------------- State Prison Guards Win Restraining Order Against Investigators ('The Fresno Bee' Says The California Prison Guards Union Obtained A Temporary Restraining Order Tuesday From San Francisco Superior Court Judge Raymond Williamson Against Investigators Probing Allegations That Guards Set Up Inmate Rapes At Corcoran State Prison - A Hearing Was Scheduled September 4 On The Union's Request For A Permanent Injunction) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 05:12:15 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US CA: State Prison Guards Win Restraining Order Against Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jo-D Harrison (email@example.com) Source: Fresno Bee, The Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.fresnobee.com/ Pubdate: 27 Aug 1998 Section: Local News STATE PRISON GUARDS WIN RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST INVESTIGATORS SACRAMENTO - The state prison guards union has won a temporary restraining order against investigators probing allegations that guards set up inmate rapes at Corcoran State Prison. Investigators from the state Attorney General's Office, the Department of Corrections and the FBI are investigating allegations that Wayne Robertson, a 6-foot-3-inch, 230-pound inmate nicknamed "Booty Bandit," raped a 120-pound inmate after guards prompted him. He also is accused of sexually assaulting 15 inmates at Corcoran State Prison between the late 1980s and mid-1990s, according to documents and testimony at a recent legislative hearing. Robertson was never charged. San Francisco Superior Court Judge Raymond Williamson granted the restraining order Tuesday. The California Correctional Peace Officers Association requested the order after state agents interviewed more than 20 prison officers last week, but barred union representatives or union lawyers from accompanying them. State agents said they didn't want to tip off potential criminal targets to the investigation. "The officers just know they are being treated like dogs," said Michael L. Rains, a lawyer representing the union. "The Department of Corrections folks were threatening witnesses." Corcoran Warden George Galaza cited a state law in forcing officer witnesses to cooperate with the investigation or be removed from their job for insubordination, according to court documents. The union argued that the lack of union representation was a denial of fundamental rights. A Sept. 4 hearing was scheduled on the union's request for a permanent injunction. State authorities vowed the investigation would continue despite the court order.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Prison Sergeant Arrested In Drug Bust ('The Las Vegas Sun' Says A Sergeant At Northern Nevada Correctional Center Was Among Four People Arrested During A Raid On A Home In Carson City Wednesday - James Lillo Was Held In Lieu Of $7,500 Bail For Allegedly Having Marijuana And Methamphetamine, Paraphernalia And A Hypodermic Needle) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 06:41:11 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US NV: Prison Sergeant Arrested In Drug Bust Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com (Frank S. World) Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/ Pubdate: Thur, 27 Aug 1998 PRISON SERGEANT ARRESTED IN DRUG BUST CARSON CITY (AP) - A sergeant at Northern Nevada Correctional Center was among four people arrested during a drug raid on a Sherman Drive home late Wednesday. James Lillo, 48, was taken into custody for allegedly having marijuana and methamphetamine, paraphernalia and a hypodermic needle when a search warrant was served on his home. He was jailed in lieu of $7,500 bail. According to a spokeswoman for the TriNet Task Force, Lillo's wife, Susan, 42, was the raid's primary reason. Lt. Wendy Armstrong said Mrs. Lillo was the subject of a three-month undercover investigation. Mrs. Lillo was arrested on two trafficking counts. She is also being held on counts of possession of a controlled substance, paraphernalia, hypodermics and a misdemeanor warrant. Her bail is $75,000. Hazel Smith, 30, was arrested on counts charging possession of a controlled substance, paraphernalia and hypodermics. Her bail is $4,790. Russell Bridges, 31, was arrested for allegedly having burglary tools and paraphernalia.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Tulsan Arrested In Pot Case ('The Tulsa World' Says John Frazee Is Being Jailed In Lieu Of More Than $30,000 Bail Because He Had 332 Marijuana Plants In His Back Yard He Wasn't Even Trying To Conceal - No Word On What Police Did To His 11-Year-Old Daughter) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 18:31:36 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US OK: Tulsan Arrested In Pot Case Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Michael Pearson (email@example.com) Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Source: Tulsa World (OK) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.tulsaworld.com Author: World's own Service TULSAN ARRESTED IN POT CASE A Tulsa man remained in jail Wednesday after police found 332 marijuana plants, some 6 feet tall, growing in his back yard. John Frazee, 48, was arrested about 7:15 p.m. Tuesday at his residence at 1821 N. Evanston Place, Sgt. Wayne Allen said. Uniform Division North Street Crimes officers received a tip from a confidential informant that marijuana was growing at that residence, Allen said. The resident voluntarily led them to the back yard, where they found the plants, Allen said. There was no apparent attempt to hide the plants, Allen said. Allen said Frazee also allowed officers to search his residence, where they reportedly found two marijuana cigarettes and three guns. Police reports indicate that Frazee's 11-year-old daughter was home at the time of the arrest, Allen said. Frazee, who told officers that he was self-employed, was being held in the Tulsa Jail on more than $30,000 bail.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Grand Jury Focuses On Oregon's Slaying ('The Houston Chronicle' Says Harris County Grand Jurors Began Hearing Testimony Wednesday In The Case Of Pedro Oregon Navarro, An Innocent Man Killed By Six Prohibition Agents In Houston, Texas, Who Broke Into His Home Without A Warrant And Shot Him 12 Times From The Rear) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 05:13:55 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US TX: Grand Jury Focuses On Oregon'S Slaying Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: email@example.com Source: Houston Chronicle (TX) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.chron.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Author: Steve Brewer GRAND JURY FOCUSES ON OREGON'S SLAYING Harris County grand jurors began hearing testimony Wednesday in the case of Pedro Oregon Navarro, who was killed by Houston police who had burst into his home without a warrant. Meeting behind closed doors, grand jurors heard testimony throughout the day as shouts from protesters calling for justice could be heard ringing through the courthouse complex. "Pedro Oregon's family wants a full and vigorous investigation because they fear a token investigation where the police will be ultimately exonerated, and it's business as usual for the police department," said Paul Nugent, an attorney representing Oregon's relatives. Oregon, 22, died July 12 in a hail of bullets fired by six police officers who were following a tip from an informant that drugs were being sold in the home. A shot fired by one officer hit another officer in his bullet-resistant vest and knocked him to the floor, police said. The officers, who are now on paid suspensions, apparently thought the shot had been fired by Oregon, and they opened fire. They fired about 30 rounds, and 12 of them hit Oregon. Nine struck him in the back, one in the back of the head, one in back of the shoulder and one in the back of the hand. No drugs were found in the apartment, and Oregon had not fired a gun at police, though one was found in the apartment. Oregon, who had no criminal record, also had no traces of drugs or alcohol in his system. Prosecutors say they expect to take testimony for at least two weeks. Nugent said the shooting, which has prompted numerous protests, deserves close scrutiny and that prosecutors have agreed to allow others who were in the apartment that night to testify before grand jurors. Nugent said the police department tried to mislead the public about the shooting and he hopes prosecutors and grand jurors aren't misled as well. Copyright 1998 Houston Chronicle
------------------------------------------------------------------- Board Settles Suit Filed By Worker ('The New Haven Register' Says Robert Lyon, A Former Custodian Who Claimed He Was Fired In October 1994 By The East Haven, Connecticut, Board Of Education Because He Was Once A 'Drug' User, Has Obtained A Of $6,300 Settlement, But Not His Job Back) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1998 22:32:25 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US CT: Board Settles Suit Filed By Worker Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: General Pulaski Source: New Haven Register Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.ctcentral.com/ Pubdate: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 Author: Allan Drury BOARD SETTLES SUIT FILED BY WORKER EAST HAVEN - The Board of Education has reached a settlement with a former custodian who claimed he was fired because he was once a drug user. The board has authorized payment of $6,300 to Robert Lyon, who lost his job in October 1994. The board will pay an additional $3,000 to Lyon's law firm, Williams, Polan & Pattis, of New Haven, to cover his legal expenses. Before Lyon sued the board in U.S. District Court in Bridgeport, the state Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities ruled there was "reasonable cause" to believe Lyon was a victim of illegal discrimination. Norman Pattis, Lyon's lawyer, said he believes the board's willingness to make the payment vindicates his client. "We're very thankful to the Board of Education for settling," Pattis said Thursday. "We take that to be recognition that they made a bad decision" in firing Lyon. Pattis said the settlement does not require the board to give Lyon his job back, but Lyon said he wants to return. He currently works for a limousine service, he said. "If we're going to take rehabilitation seriously, then we should take Mr. Lyon seriously," Pattis said. "It's time to welcome him back to the community." Lyon, 49, of Branford, said he "would love to come back" to the schools job. He has admitted to once having a drug problem and having a police record, but says he has recovered. Board Chairwoman Linda Abbott declined to comment, saying she believed neither side was supposed to comment on the settlement. "It's a personnel matter and I won't discuss personnel issues," she said. Board lawyer David Ryan, of Waterbury, is on vacation and could not be reached. Lyon said in the lawsuit, which he filed in December 1996, that just before he was fired, then-Civil Service Commission Chairwoman Patricia Mellion, who would later become a board member, complained about a drug addict and convicted felon working in the system. Mellion, who served on the board from 1995 to 1997, later said she was not singling out Lyon or any other employee and did not recall making a comment about a drug addict. She said she was trying to make the point that the board employed some people who were not on approved civil service lists. Two days later, school board Director of Buildings and Grounds told Lyon he was fired, but did not give him any reason why, Lyon said in the lawsuit.
------------------------------------------------------------------- The First Amendment And The Pot Protest (A Staff Editorial From WCVB Television In Boston Says The City Should Not Be Allowed To Force MassCan To Urge People Not To Smoke Marijuana During Its Annual Rally At Boston Common)Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 18:16:28 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US MA: Editorial: The First Amendment and the Pot Protest Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Dick Evans) Source: WCVB Television, Boston Author: Editorial Staff Contact: email@example.com Pubdate: Airdate: August 27, 1998 The First Amendment and the Pot Protest The city of Boston has a problem: MassCann's request for a permit to rally on Boston Common. The organization's purpose is to advocate the legalization of marijuana and, for nine years, it has held a rally to do just that. This year, the Parks Department first denied the permit, then approved it with conditions. Now the matter is before the courts. The issue is whether some conditions the city wishes to impose on MassCann are discriminatory and have the effect of denying the group its First Amendment rights. The City wants to dictate what the organization says to the attending crowd about marijuana and the law. But you can't require an organization to say or not say something. The Boston Common, like Hyde Park in London, is a gathering place for people with all sorts of causes. Attendees should come knowing that, if they break the law, they will be arrested. But it should also be clear that Boston Common is today, as it has been for over 300 years, a place for the free exchange of ideas, no matter how radical or politically unpopular. Copyright 1998 WCVB TV.
------------------------------------------------------------------- West Virginia, Kentucky Fraternities Take Pledge To Phase Out Booze (An 'Associated Press' Article In 'The Miami Herald' Says Starting This Week, West Virginia University's 15 Chapter Houses Are Phasing Out Alcohol And By The 2000-01 School Year, They Will Be Alcohol-Free - At The University Of Kentucky In Lexington, Officials Have Banned Alcohol From On-Campus Undergraduate Housing, Including The School's Fraternities) From: "W.H.E.N. - Bob Owen" (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: "-News" (email@example.com) Subject: West Virginia, Kentucky fraternities take pledge to phase out booze Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:03:33 -0700 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Published Thursday, August 27, 1998, in the Miami Herald West Virginia, Kentucky fraternities take pledge to phase out booze Associated Press The days when hundreds of students could pile into a fraternity house to chug from beer kegs and liquor-filled bathtubs are over at West Virginia University and the University of Kentucky. Starting this week, WVU's 15 chapter houses are phasing out alcohol. By the 2000-01 school year, they will be alcohol-free. At Kentucky's campus in Lexington, officials banned alcohol from on-campus undergraduate housing, including the school's fraternities. Sororities and undergraduate dormitories have been dry for years. "Personally, I wish they didn't do it," said Jeremy Nalli, a junior and president of UK's Kappa Sigma chapter, "but if that's the way it comes down, we're going to enforce it." The drive to ban alcohol took on added importance with the alcohol-related deaths of students last year at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Louisiana State. Kentucky is one of nine universities that have adopted alcohol-free housing, according to the Indianapolis-based National Interfraternity Conference, which represents 66 national fraternities. The others are Rhode Island, Idaho, Iowa, Oklahoma State, Utah State, Northern Arizona, Colorado and Washington State. At West Virginia, the new drinking policy that went into effect Monday allows for some drinking this year and next, but only under strict supervision and with much more limited guest lists than in years past. Sororities at WVU already are dry, along with four fraternities that volunteered to go booze-free. The other chapter houses agreed to the new policy after a weekend meeting with WVU administrators. *** When away, you can STOP and RESTART W.H.E.N.'s news clippings by sending an e-mail to email@example.com. Ignore the Subject: line. In the body put "unsubscribe when" to STOP. To RESTART, put "subscribe when" in the e-mail instead (No quotation marks.)
------------------------------------------------------------------- Two Cigarette Companies Back Out Of Talks With States ('The Associated Press' Says RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company And Brown And Williamson Tobacco Corporation, For Unstated Reasons, Have Dropped Out Of Negotiations With The Attorneys General For Three Dozen States Who Have Been Trying To Extort A National Tobacco Settlement - Mississippi, Minnesota, Texas And Florida Settled Their Lawsuits Separately For $36.8 Billion) From: "W.H.E.N. - Bob Owen" (firstname.lastname@example.org) To: "-News" (email@example.com) Subject: Two cigarette companies back out of talks with states Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:06:14 -0700 Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Two cigarette companies back out of talks with states By Todd Lewan, Associated Press, 08/27/98 06:14 NEW YORK (AP) - As state attorneys general return to their efforts to reach a national tobacco settlement, two leading industry players - R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. and Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. - have dropped out of the negotiations. In the latest effort to settle more than three dozen lawsuits by states seeking to recover Medicaid funds spent treating sick smokers, losing Reynolds and Brown & Williamson, the second and third-largest cigarette makers, was an unexpected hitch. "Apparently, we're down to negotiations with two companies," Fred Olson, a spokesman for Washington Attorney General Christine Gregoire, said Wednesday. Phillip Morris Inc. and Lorillard Tobacco Co. are still involved in the talks, which were to resume today after a three-week recess. Other states involved are North Carolina, California, Massachusetts, North Dakota, New York, Oklahoma and Colorado. It was unclear why the companies were boycotting the talks or how serious the rift was between the tobacco companies. Spokesmen for Reynolds and Brown & Williamson declined to comment late Wednesday, as did Scott Williams, an industry spokesman in Washington. Olson said Reynolds and Brown & Williamson refused to cede ground on "public health initiatives that are critical" to the states. "If and when they want to talk about those terms the attorneys general will welcome them back to the table," he said. The negotiations are an attempt to salvage a proposed national agreement reached in June 1997 in which Big Tobacco would have paid $368.5 billion over 25 years in return for broad protection from liability suits. That deal collapsed in June in Congress, which had to approve it. Mississippi, Minnesota, Texas and Florida settled their lawsuits separately for $36.8 billion, so the rest of the states began direct talks with America's biggest tobacco companies in mid-July. The industry offered an estimated $180 billion to $200 billion to be split among the remaining 46 states. The money would come from a 35 cents-a-pack increase in cigarette prices. One proposal had the industry paying the first $15 to $20 billion to the states over a period of five years. But the talks stalled after two weeks. Both sides split over the types of marketing restrictions, anti-smoking measures and other public-health concessions the industry would make.
------------------------------------------------------------------- McGwire Drug Affair A Bum Rap For Him ('Boston Globe' Sports Columnist Dan Shaughnessy In 'The International Herald Tribune' Says Mark McGwire, The St. Louis Cardinal Pursuing Baseball's Home-Run Record, Is Being Unfairly Characterized As A Cheater And Bad Role Model Because Of His Use Of Androstenedione) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 14:28:10 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: US: IHT: McGwire Drug Affair A Bum Rap for Him Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Peter Webster Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Source: International Herald Tribune Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.iht.com/ Author: Dan Shaughnessy, The Boston Globe MCGWIRE DRUG AFFAIR A BUM RAP FOR HIM Slugger Is Not Cheating With His Steroids BOSTON---No wonder ballplayers loathe the media. Mark McGwire is stalking one of baseball's most cherished records---until now the feel-good story of the baseball summer --- and suddenly he's engaged in a tabloid-driven controversy that's painting him as a cheater and a bad role model. It's unfair. If you just dropped in from a two week trip to Guam, here's the background: An Associated Press reporter noticed a jar of androstenedione in McGwire's locker last week. He asked the slugger about the stuff, did some homework and wrote about it. Androstenedione, known in baseball clubhouses as "andro," is an all-natural, over-the-counter steroid (not of the dangerous anabolic steroid family) that is used to help an athlete train harder and recover faster. It is banned by the National Football League, the National Collegiate Athletic Association and the International Olympic Committee, but allowed by the National Hockey League, National Basketball Association and Major League Baseball. There. McGwire takes something that can be sold at any drugstore and is permitted by his sport, and suddenly he's lumped with the Olympic swimmer Michelle Smith-de Bruinand the sprinter Ben lohnson. Wake up. The International Olympic Committee has limits on caffeine intake. Juan Antonio Samaranch would strip McGwire's medal if he went to the plate after consuming eight cups of strong coffee. The story of McGwire' s historic home run chase is being tarnished because folks are hearing bits of stories and reading wild headlines and concluding that Big Mac is a pharmaceutical creation. McGwire is not some 98-pound weakling who went on the juice and came back as Rambo. He is a huge, muscular man, who hit 49 home runs in his first big league season 12 years ago. In Tuesday's Boston Globe, a doctor said that andro is part of McGwire's success. This makes it sound as if the substance is adding 40 feet (12 meters) to McGwire's long fly balls. This is ridiculous. Andro might help McGwire stay healthy and aid his recovery time from injuries, but the same could be said about aspirin or any other pain reliever. If a slugger eats Wheaties cereal (sold over the counter, not banned by MLB) wouldn't it be true that Wheaties are part of his success? What about steak? Is eating prime rib part of McGwire's success? In McGwire's case, it is misleading to write that he's using a "performanceenhancing drug." He's a baseball player, not an Olympic sprinter. There' s nothing sold at drugstores that would help any of us hit a home run in the big leagues (unless the store has a book on hitting written by Ted Williams). Facing Randy Johnson and hitting a ball over the fence requires bravery, timing, hand-eye coordination, reflexes, leverage and strength. Most of all, it requires practice. Meanwhile, how many other baseball players are taking the same stuff? McGwire probably doesn't go more than a couple of days without hitting against a pitcher who uses andro. While we're at it, what about creatine, another dietary supplement sold over the counter, also used by McGwire? What about METRx (endorsed on radio and in print by Mo Vaughn of the Boston Red Sox)? McGwire's been a good citizen, never one to disgrace the uniform. Most recently he's dedicated his charity efforts to awareness and funding for abused children. And now he's got to read that he's a bad example to young athletes? Please. Perhaps andro will be proven unsafe. That is an issue for the Food and Drug Administration and for Major League Baseball and its Players Association. In the meantime McGwire should be left alone on this issue. We've all heard the stories about Roger Maris's hair falling out from stress when he chased Babe Ruth's record in the summer of 1961. Turns out Roger was lucky. He didn't play in 1998, when you can do something legal and be painted as a cheater. And what about the Babe? The Bambino hit 60 homers in 1927, the seventh year of Prohibition. Think he might have had a little bathtub gin coursing through his veins at any point during the '27 season? Hope not. After all, it would have been a bad message for youngsters.
------------------------------------------------------------------- As For Drugs, Baseball Is Full Of Beans (Illinois 'Daily Herald' Sports Columnist Barry Rozner Comments On The Mark McGwire Controversy With A Startling Assertion That An Unnamed 'Current Baseball Executive, Who Happens To Have A Medical Background,' Claims 25 Percent To 30 Percent Of All Baseball Players Use Amphetamintes - Home Runs Are All About Bat Speed And Quickness - If You Want Something To Be Upset About, Stop Peeking In Mark McGwire's Locker And Start Wondering Why Baseball Doesn't Have A Drug-Testing Policy) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:15:19 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US IL: As For Drugs, Baseball Is Full Of Beans Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Steve Young (firstname.lastname@example.org) Source: Daily Herald (IL) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.dailyherald.com/ Pubdate: 27 Aug 1998 Author: Barry Rozner AS FOR DRUGS, BASEBALL IS FULL OF BEANS There's just one thing left to say about this Mark McGwire debate: Beans. That's right, beans. As in, coffee beans. That's what they call them in baseball. That's what they call their big, dirty secret that you never hear a word about. What are beans? That's an easy one. They're uppers. Speed. Amphetamines. Players put them in their coffee and drink up about an hour before gametime. And it's going on in a clubhouse near you. Right now. Every day. In every city. With every team. One current baseball executive, who happens to have a medical background, estimates that 25-30 percent of the players today use amphetamines, which happen to be illegal unless prescribed by a physician. Of course, the only thing uppers are usually prescribed for as we approach the year 2000 is narcolepsy. It would be a cheap shot to suggest the Cubs have been asleep for the last 90 years and probably could use the help, so we won't even mention it. The point is, while a quarter of all players - or perhaps many more when you include the more popular off-the field hallucinogens - are using illegal drugs, a lot of people have been pounding Mark McGwire for supplementing his workout regime with a perfectly legal, over-the-counter potion. The stuff McGwire uses, androstenedione, may not even work for all we know, and it certainly has nothing to do with hitting home runs. He takes it an hour before he works out, and it supposedly allows harder training of muscles and a quicker recovery. He doesn't take them before a game, as do the bean-counters, and even if he did, it wouldn't matter. Anyone who knows anything about baseball knows that muscles have nothing to do with hitting home runs. Home runs are all about bat speed and quickness. It's about hand-eye coordination and the ability to recognize the spin on the ball and the location of the pitch. Meanwhile, hundreds of players are "beaning up'' before games to get a lift with hopes of focusing better, being more alert and getting a jolt to enhance their performance. "For some guys, they think it helps them mentally,'' says one American League player. "Some guys think it helps them physically. I tried it and one day I almost went through a dugout railing chasing a foul ball. I guess that day I had a few too many beans for breakfast.'' So if you want something to be upset about, stop peeking in Mark McGwire's locker and start wondering why baseball doesn't have a drug-testing policy. And wonder why everyone in baseball looks the other way while players get addicted to illegal drugs and use them even after their careers end. And wonder why the players association does everything in its power to avoid a drug-testing clause in any collective-bargaining agreement, while every other union in sports supports the idea. And stop with the idiotic suggestion that Mark McGwire would own a tainted record because he uses muscle-building or muscle-enhancing products. Ernie Banks was the skinniest man in baseball when he hit 512 home runs. Babe Ruth was the fattest man in baseball when he hit 714 of them. And Mickey Mantle was the most hung over, probably unable to even lift a weight, but he managed 536 home runs. So if you want to imply that by putting chemicals in his body McGwire may someday pay a heavy price with his own health, you are undoubtedly right. There's no argument there. But it's a personal and legal choice, and it's unfair to criticize McGwire for that. And if you've noticed, players like Sammy Sosa have gone out of their way to say "leave McGwire alone,'' because there are a lot of glass houses out there and no one's throwing stones. Before you jump on Mark McGwire's substantial back, you'd better know what you're jumping into. Know that your favorite player probably is on something, too. "It was probably as high as 90 percent in the early '80s as far as guys on speed,'' says the baseball exec. "It's way down from that now, but there shouldn't be any of it. Why is there no drug testing? That's what I'd like to know. "But no matter what, you have no business looking in a guy's locker. Whether he's got nude pictures or pink toilet paper or legal drugs, its nobody's business. What they should look into is 'beans' because that's a serious problem.'' If 25-30 percent of the players in baseball are on uppers, then do the math for the home run hitters. Twenty players already have or are near 30 homers, so probably 5 or 6 of them are getting an illegal boost. Which ones are having their cake, and drinking their coffee, too? Maybe one of them is your hero. Maybe he's playing in your town. Just before he hits a home run, he might be the one saying, "Bean me up Scottie, I need a lift.'' And it's high time baseball did something about it.
------------------------------------------------------------------- McGwire Sets Off A Sales Boom ('The San Jose Mercury News' Says Amateur Athletes And Bodybuilders Are Responding To The Disclosure That St. Louis Cardinals Slugger Mark McGwire Uses Androstenedione By Boosting Sales At Health Food Stores - But So Far, The Only Proven Benefits Are To Those Who Sell It) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 06:08:49 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US CA: McGwire Sets Off A Sales Boom Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Marcus/Mermelstein Family (firstname.lastname@example.org) Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Author: Lisa M. Krieger, Mercury News Staff Writer MCGWIRE SETS OFF A SALES BOOM Legal hormone used by Cardinals' basher has unproven value, possible risks, experts warn Amateur athletes and bodybuilders are responding to the disclosure that St. Louis Cardinals slugger Mark McGwire uses androstenedione by boosting sales at health food stores -- when they can find it. ``We've been selling a lot. We can't keep it on the shelves,'' said Jamie Laubacher of Great Earth Vitamin Store at the Oakridge Mall in San Jose. ``I sold 20 boxes in two days -- and would have sold more, if I had it.'' But so far, the only people it's proven to help are the ones who sell it. Medical experts say no studies have been done to validate claims for the legal steroid hormone -- and warn that long-term use could be dangerous. Wary of possible harm, some stores like health-product giant General Nutrition Centers have resisted the temptation to carry it. ``We took a close look at the product and determined that the current level of research, we were not comfortable with it,'' according to Greg Miller, a representative of the 3,700-store Pennsylvania-based chain. Sold over the counter at $30 to $50 a box under names such as ``EAS Andro-Blend'' and ``AST Andro-Plex 700,'' androstenedione is unregulated by government authorities. It is purported to provide a natural and legal way to build muscles and boost sex drive by raising levels of testosterone, the male sex hormone. The 6-foot-5-inch, 250-pound McGwire, who is in the spotlight as he chases baseball's single-season home run record, acknowledged Sunday that he regularly takes androstenedione (pronounced an-dro-STEEN-di-own). Because of growing concerns over players' health, baseball commissioner Bud Selig and players association executive director Donald Fehr have decided to take a closer look at Major League Baseball's own policy, which allows use of the substance. The two called Tuesday for the joint medical representatives of the league and the union ``to gather the relevant scientific and medical data and to consult with other experts on the general use of nutritional supplements by major league players.'' That could be a challenge. Good medical data doesn't exist, said Dr. Gary Wadler, associate professor of clinical medicine at the New York University School of Medicine and 1993 recipient of the International Olympic Committee's President's Prize. ``I've looked for research but come up short. What's out there are just claims made by those with a vested interest in the product,'' said Wadler, the author of ``Drugs and the Athlete'' -- the bible on performance-enhancing drugs. Both men and women produce androstenedione in their adrenal glands, which sit atop the kidneys. In men, it is converted to testosterone, which floods their bodies during early adulthood and dwindles as they age. Studies of the hormone have been done in animals -- one of the most credible in a small bird called the zebra finch. Researchers found that the hormone caused female finches to abandon their delicate songs and start singing like males. But there have no controlled, peer-reviewed and published studies in humans. The only available data is found in the product's East German patent application, which claims that androstenedione almost doubled normal testosterone levels. But anything can be written in a patent filing without documentation, said exercise physiologist David M. Lightsey of Bakersfield, who heads the Ergonomic Task Force of the National Council for Reliable Health Information, a group of medical professionals who monitor allegations of health fraud. Nor has the 25-year-old East German data been duplicated by other researchers, he noted. Even without the research, androstenedione can be sold over the counter under terms of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994, which permits the sale of hormones such as androstenedione and creatine, another purported performance enhancer taken by McGwire, as long as the substances do not make therapeutic claims. The act essentially removed the products from oversight by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. ``We cannot disallow it,'' an FDA official said of androstenedione. ``We don't review the product before it is put on the market. . . . The responsibility is put on the manufacturer to ensure it is safe and labeled properly. We take action if there are reports of illness or injuries or complaints by the public.'' Despite the lack of federal restrictions, scientists familiar with the hormone caution against its use in healthy people. Androstenedione should be taken only under a doctor's supervision by men who do not produce their own testosterone, said Peter Hornsby, associate professor of cell biology at Baylor College of Medicine, who studies the body's hormone-making cells. ``It is extremely dangerous . . . because a normal male doesn't need any more testosterone. If you are a male without it, see a doctor. If you're a female, don't take it because it will have a masculinizing effect,'' said Hornsby. Doctors worry that increased levels of testosterone could cause an otherwise dormant prostate tumor to grow, or could cause prostate enlargement. Other complications could include breast enlargement, personality change and liver or heart problems. Trying to isolate male hormones in the 1950s, scientists first obtained androstenedione by distilling 25,000 liters of male police officers' urine. Synthesis quickly followed, enabling production of larger quantities. Androstenedione was routinely used in nasal-spray form by East German scientists in the mid-1960s and 1970s to boost testosterone levels in both male and female athletes, according to the online magazine Muscle Media 2000. Androstenedione was rediscovered about a year ago when the owner of a supplement company stumbled onto the German patent and realized it would be a legal over-the-counter product. Those who back the product say there's little need for regulation because it is ``natural,'' converting to testosterone in the body. ``I think its more B.S. to write about,'' said Oakland A's first baseman Jason Giambi, who also uses androstenedione. ``The stuff is not illegal. It's not an anabolic steroid. . . . It's kind of sad that someone is trying to mar someone else's (McGwire's) accomplishments.'' According to A's head trainer Larry Davis: ``If they (the players) are going to use it, they're going to use it. It's best that we know about it. We don't disallow you from bringing it into the clubhouse, because it's over the counter. . . . We don't supply it, we don't endorse it, but we don't ban it.'' But testimonials by sports heroes like McGwuire could be persuasive to youths, who may be most at risk, said physiologist Lightsey. ``It sets a terrible example to the kids on the block. Athletes are naive. They aren't out to scam anybody. But they don't have a formal scientific background and buy it all, hook, line and sinker,'' said Lightsey. Mercury News Staff Writer Howard Bryant contributed to this report. 1997 - 1998 Mercury Center.
------------------------------------------------------------------- 'Drug Czar's' Plan To Shore Up Leaky Border Meets With Skepticism ('The Christian Science Monitor' Version Of Recent News About General Barry McCaffrey Lobbying For A US-Mexico Border Drug Czarlet) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 12:34:55 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US TX: 'Drug Czar's' Plan to Shore Up Leaky Border Meets With Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: firstname.lastname@example.org (Frank S. World) Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Source: Christian Science Monitor Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.csmonitor.com/ Author: Kyle Johnson, Special to The Christian Science Monitor 'DRUG CZAR'S' PLAN TO SHORE UP LEAKY BORDER MEETS WITH SKEPTICISM AUSTIN, TEXAS -- In a high-profile display of the tactical sensibilities for which he was tapped, "drug czar" retired Gen. Barry McCaffrey this week proposed an aggressive plan to shore up federal antidrug efforts along the US-Mexico border - the main corridor for narcotics into the United States. Yet many experts believe the moves, while helpful, will not significantly cut down on the plastic baggies of marijuana and cocaine hidden in car fenders that routinely make their way to the streets of America. One reason: simple economics. While demand for heroin and other illicit drugs remains high, drug watchers contend that a large amount of contraband will still filter across the border. "As long as there are Americans with money and the desire for drugs, somebody will provide that, no matter what roadblocks you put in the way," says Mark Kleiman, a professor of drug policy at the University of California at Los Angeles. The new roadblocks General McCaffrey hopes to set up are nonetheless intended to make smuggling drugs across America's Southwest border considerably more difficult. A key provision of his plan - which will be presented to President Clinton this fall - calls for the creation of a Southwest border czar. The official, probably based in El Paso, Texas, would coordinate the efforts of the 22 federal, state, and local law-enforcement agencies in the region. Currently, the interdiction missions of the FBI, Immigration and Naturalization Service, US Customs Service, and others are widely perceived to be hampered by poor communication and interagency turf wars. Under McCaffrey's plan, the border czar could pool these agencies' resources and create a unified policy on interdiction efforts. The proposal also calls for increasing the number of agents on the border (from 12,000 to 22,000) and for a more sophisticated network of surveillance technology. This equipment would create a border-long "electronic curtain" to supplant the painstaking process of hand-checking vehicles and rail cars crossing into the US. More than 60 percent of the estimated 300 tons of cocaine that enter the country each year are believed to pass through the 24 ports of entry and 39 crossing points of the US-Mexico border. More than half of the methamphetamine and marijuana reaching America is also believed to come across the Mexican border. But the search for smuggled drugs can be like looking for a needle in a haystack, McCaffrey says. The amount of cocaine estimated to come across the US-Mexico border each year would fill only six trucks - yet more than 3.5 million trucks and rail cars cross the border annually. According to the US Customs Service, current interdiction efforts stop 10 to 20 percent of the flow. Privately, some border agents put the figure as low as 2 to 3 percent. McCaffrey said he expects his plan, if adopted, to stop 50 percent of the drugs within 10 years. "We can do for drug interdiction what we have done for air-travel safety," he said. "One hundred thousand Americans get on airplanes each day. At the price of minor inconvenience and delay, they have traded virtually guaranteed security against the threat of guns and explosives." Few independent analysts, however, have similar confidence. Mr. Kleiman notes that while interdiction spending has more than doubled since 1979, the street price of a gram of cocaine has decreased eightfold over the same period - suggesting that the market is more flooded than ever. "Our current ... efforts are focused on shrinking supply,... we ought to be focusing our efforts on minimizing demand," Kleiman says. To that end, he and others have developed a new policy alternative of "coerced abstinence," endorsed by Mr. Clinton and newly available to states this year. It works by focusing on "heavy use" drug addicts - those with $10,000 to $15,000 per year habits - who make up a small fraction of total drug users but nevertheless consume 75 percent of the market. Still, most Americans aren't ready to give up the war on drugs just yet. In a March study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, 66 percent of Americans favored increased antidrug spending, despite the fact that 78 percent of all respondents termed "the war on drugs as having failed thus far."
------------------------------------------------------------------- Traffickers Move Into Yucatan Peninsula ('The Los Angeles Times' Says The Resort Area In The Gulf Of Mexico Is Rapidly Gaining A Reputation As Mexico's 'Cocaine Coast,' Fueled In Part By Traffickers' Switch From Planes To Ships And Small Boats, Their Expansion To Less Patrolled Areas, And Their Use Of Corruption To Virtually Take Over States Such As Quintana Roo, Where Cancun Is Located) Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:32:20 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: Mexico: Traffickers Move Into Yucatan Peninsula Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Jim Rosenfield Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.latimes.com/ Pubdate: 27 August 1998 Author: MARY BETH SHERIDAN, Times Staff Writer TRAFFICKERS MOVE INTO YUCATAN PENINSULA Mexican tourist paradise becoming 'cocaine coast' as smugglers, aided by extensive corruption, expand their reach, U.S. officials say. CANCUN, Mexico--Tourists strolling down Cancun's palm-lined hotel strip normally see nothing more scandalous than an undersized bikini. But recently they were startled by a novel sight: scores of Mexican soldiers and anti-drug agents roaring into a gated community of million-dollar homes on the lagoon across from the Sheraton Hotel. The soldiers and black-clad drug agents swarmed through Isla Dorada, an enclave of Mediterranean-style villas with carved wooden doors and stained-glass windows, stopping to search three homes. The target: Ramon Alcides Magana, an alleged drug lord with a warrant out for his arrest. "It was the first time in our lives we've seen such a dramatic mobilization," said Rogelio Marquez, the owner of a nearby hotel. The soldiers, he said, arrived "like Rambo." The June raid underscored a trend that is alarming the U.S. and Mexican governments. The Yucatan peninsula, known in the U.S. as a holiday paradise of crystal beaches and Maya pyramids, is rapidly gaining a new reputation--as a drug-trafficking center. The emergence of Mexico's "cocaine coast" in recent months has been fueled in part by traffickers' switch in recent years from planes to ships and small boats. But it also illustrates something more troubling, according to U.S. officials. They say traffickers, long notorious in northwest Mexico near the U.S. border, are expanding their reach to less patrolled areas, and using corruption to virtually take over states such as Quintana Roo, where Cancun is located. "Quintana Roo has become a narco-state," said a U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "It's corrupt from the traffic cop to the governor." The state's governor, Mario Villanueva, denies any links with the narcotics trade and calls such allegations politically motivated "slander." While acknowledging that drug trafficking is a problem, he has said it is less serious in Quintana Roo than in other parts of Mexico. But U.S. and Mexican government officials, most of whom spoke on condition of anonymity, paint a picture of a region that has become a major drug crossroads. Tons of cocaine--as many as 15 tons, according to one U.S. official--move through the peninsula each month. Authorities emphasize that tourists have been practically untouched by the drug activity. But some people fear that could change. "Obviously, we are wondering if we will see ourselves involved in something like what happens in Colombia," where traffickers have unleashed waves of bombings and assassinations, said Elba Capuchino, a federal legislator from Cancun for the left-of-center Democratic Revolution Party, or PRD. Amid the Glitz, Evidence Abounds Amid the high-rise hotels and palm-fringed beaches, evidence of the narcotics trade abounds in Quintana Roo. In recent months, traffickers' boats have been seized in such famed tourist sites as the island of Cozumel and the seaside village of Tulum. In downtown Cancun, authorities discovered a warehouse in June stuffed with 269 pounds of cocaine and boat equipment, the second such seizure in a year. The traffickers themselves are joining the wealthy Mexicans and sunburned Americans enjoying Cancun. Last month, two Italians alleged to be Mafia drug traffickers were arrested in the city. Leaders of Mexico's Juarez cartel also have moved in, officials say. A glitzy resort whose first hotel opened only in 1974, Cancun has been a stop for drug traffickers in the past. In the most notorious case, a Mexican kingpin, Rafael Aguilar Guajardo, was gunned down in 1993 in the hotel district. But the region's importance has surged in the past few years, officials say, as authorities cracked down on planes ferrying cocaine from Colombia to Mexico, the main gateway to the U.S. drug market. In response, traffickers have switched to sea routes, taking advantage of hundreds of miles of Mexican coastline pocked with coves and lightly patrolled by the government. Sometimes the traffickers use small boats that pick up bundles of cocaine from big ships or low-flying planes offshore, and zip to the coast. In other cases, speedboats carrying a ton or more of drugs make the 600-mile trip directly from Colombian islands such as San Andres to Mexico. "This is the trendy route for drug traffickers," said a senior Mexican justice official. Tulum, a village 80 miles southwest of Cancun famed for its Maya ruins, offers a snapshot of the thriving cocaine route. Local fishermen say they frequently spot boats abandoned by traffickers who have hauled their valuable cargo through the woods to inland roads. >From there, it heads by land to the United States. "In 1997, we began to see strange boats. I think they're from Colombia," said Reynaldo Mas, a tanned Maya fisherman. Local fishermen showed a reporter the hulks of two boats that were torched on the shore after having been stripped of their equipment. Several other drug boats have been seized by authorities, they say. They have 200- or 400-horsepower engines, far stronger than the sputtering 40- or 60-horsepower engines of fishermen, the locals say. "They come at night. When it's dawn, they're abandoned," Mas said. Sometimes, the fishermen said, they find Coke cans and cookie wrappers from Colombia in the water. If Tulum offers one glimpse of the new cocaine crossroads, Cancun offers another. With 13 million visitors a year--compared with a permanent population of only 400,000--it is the perfect place for an outsider to fit in. Especially an outsider who likes new cars, $90-a-person restaurants and pulsating discos. Far-Flung Network of Corruption Since the death last year of Amado Carrillo Fuentes, the leader of Mexico's Juarez cartel, several of his lieutenants have either moved to Cancun or appear to be spending more time here, say U.S. and Mexican authorities. Alleged drug lords such as Carrillo's brother, Vicente, and Eduardo Gonzalez Quirarte have moved down to join Alcides Magana, who authorities say is the Juarez cartel's man in the region. "It's like when the Mafia families in New York moved to Las Vegas," the U.S. official said. "They [the Mexicans] moved and have taken advantage of an opportunity. The focus is not on that area as it was in Juarez," on the U.S.-Mexican border. The traffickers don't just benefit from the anonymity of Cancun, however. According to U.S. and Mexican authorities, they have a far-flung network of government protection in Quintana Roo. Mexican authorities are now seeking the former head of the state police in Cancun, Oscar Benjamin Garcia Davila. He was fired in April 1997 for not showing up for work, a government spokesman said. He had already found another job, U.S. and Mexican officials say: as an aide to Alcides Magana, the alleged drug lord. "He's the chief of [Alcides Magana's] bodyguards," said an intelligence official, speaking on condition of anonymity. In the past year, authorities have also captured the former commander and subcommander of the federal police in Cancun, accusing them of protecting cocaine shipments when they worked in the state. In apparent response to their difficulties with police in the state, Mexican anti-drug officials have dispatched forces from Mexico City to conduct important raids like the one at Isla Dorada. Governor Tainted by Allegations Meanwhile, corruption allegations swirl around the governor. Two respected Mexican publications--the newspaper Reforma and the weekly newsmagazine Proceso--have cited official Mexican intelligence documents alleging that Villanueva is tied to drug traffickers. A similar charge came up early last year in a Mexican court, according to confidential testimony published by the Mexican daily Universal, which was confirmed by a knowledgeable Mexican official. According to the testimony, a government witness, Tomas Colsa McGregor, said drug lord Carrillo had confided that he maintained "relations" with Villanueva and several other governors, officials say. Colsa McGregor, a jeweler who acknowledged doing business with Carrillo, was killed in July 1997, on the same day the drug lord died following plastic surgery, a Mexican official said in an interview. U.S. officials said the American government has credible information linking Villanueva to traffickers. But one official said there was not enough evidence for an indictment. In a telephone interview, Villanueva denied the allegations. He said he had never met Carrillo and had no connection to drug traffickers. After the allegations appeared in the Mexican press, he said, he even asked the attorney general's office to investigate him. Both that office and Interpol said several months ago that they were not conducting any probe of the governor. "In all of this, there has been bad faith, and a political intention to slander me. This has no factual basis," Villanueva said. In addition, he noted that in Mexico, federal authorities are in charge of the anti-narcotics fight. "Governors in Mexico don't have jurisdiction in issues of drug trafficking," he said. The governor said he had no information about corruption in the ranks of state police. A former assistant state attorney general had proposed hiring Garcia Davila, he added, saying, "These are low-level jobs that I don't get involved in." Opposition politicians acknowledge that they have no solid evidence the governor is involved with traffickers. But they note that Villanueva, a member of the dominant Institutional Revolutionary Party, or PRI, keeps a tight rein over the state's politics and press. "He has such control in the state it would be impossible for him not to know where the drug-trafficking problems are," said Marquez, the hotel owner, who is also a Cancun city councilman for the opposition National Action Party, or PAN. Federal authorities have begun to crack down on the cocaine coast. They are prosecuting several former police officers and have seized a Cancun hotel that they believe is owned by Alcides Magana. Last month, authorities arrested two alleged Italian Mafiosi living in Cancun. The Italians, Oreste Pagano and Alberto Minelli, were deported to Canada, where they face charges of cocaine trafficking. Mexican authorities believe that they also were laundering money with members of the Juarez cartel. Officials are also stepping up patrols on the coast. The increased military presence is obvious in Tulum. One recent afternoon, the village's Paradise Beach was peopled not just by fishermen and topless European sunbathers, but by soldiers scanning the horizon from a jeep parked on the sand. "There's a lot of vigilance here--helicopters, planes," said Mas, who was pulling in his fishing boat at the end of the day's work. "We can't even walk on the beach anymore. The [soldiers] say, 'What are you doing?' " Federal Authorities Outmatched, Outrun More equipment is on the way. Federal authorities say they plan to use a giant X-ray machine to check the interiors of cars and trucks in the state. Another of the machines will be installed on the border with Guatemala. Already, nearly four tons of cocaine have been seized in Quintana Roo this year, officials say--more than the amount recovered in all of 1997. But few traffickers have been detained. With high-tech ships and equipment, they appear to easily outrun anti-drug authorities. An anecdote reported in Proceso indicates how outmatched authorities are by traffickers. In May, fishermen from Isla Mujeres, near Cancun, reported spotting an abandoned boat, which turned out to have nearly a ton of cocaine on board. Fausto Carrasco Aguirre, a federal justice official in Cancun, told Proceso that he and six agents went to investigate. But they had only one way to reach Isla Mujeres: the public ferry. Even then, they couldn't afford the fare and had to haggle for a ride. Copyright 1998 Los Angeles Times. All Rights Reserved
------------------------------------------------------------------- Mexico Unveils Plan To Combat Crime Wave - $380 Million To Target Corruption, Police Training ('The Boston Globe' Says Interior Minister Francisco Labastida And Nearly All Of The Country's 31 Governors Launched A New Eight-Point Plan Yesterday Called 'The National Crusade Against Crime And Delinquency' - Mexicans Expressed Skepticism) From: "W.H.E.N. - Bob Owen" (email@example.com) To: "-News" (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Mexico unveils plan to combat crime wave Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 19:15:47 -0700 Sender: email@example.com Mexico unveils plan to combat crime wave $380m to target corruption, police training By Richard Chacon Globe Staff 08/27/98 MEXICO CITY - Under growing pressure from businesses and citizens to stem a crime wave that has swept through almost every corner of the country, Mexico announced a bipartisan initiative yesterday to reduce criminal activity. Interior Minister Francisco Labastida and nearly all of the country's 31 governors said the eight-point plan, called ``National Crusade Against Crime and Delinquency,'' would help strengthen law enforcement efforts and deter criminals. ``An outlook that shows such grave problems requires radical solutions that attack the root of the problems,'' Labastida told an audience that included President Ernesto Zedillo and members of the Cabinet. ``It also requires a unified effort among political parties and with the community.'' Mexicans expressed skepticism about the plan. An average of 1.5 million crimes occur each year in Mexico, according to the government, and although the number of assaults and rapes is down this year from last, the statistics are widely considered to underrepresent the actual figure. The number of homicides during the same period has doubled. In addition, there have been a record number of bank robberies in Mexico City and a rash of kidnappings and muggings since a severe economic recession hit the country four years ago. The centerpiece of the $380 million crime-fighting plan, which has been endorsed by Zedillo, will increase the number of federal and state police officers. It will also seek to professionalize the country's police forces by removing corrupt officers, coordinating inter-agency efforts, restructuring police training curriculum, and creating five regional police academies. The initiative will also attempt to modernize the country's crime-fighting technology through the use of computer databases and the introduction of a national telephone number for reporting crimes. Another phase of the crusade will focus on making Mexico's constitution and federal and state penal codes tougher on criminals, officials said. Yesterday's announcement followed the recent arrest of Daniel Arizmendi Lopez, the country's most wanted criminal, who is believed to be responsible for dozens of kidnappings. The arrest and continuing crime plague have sparked new calls here for the death penalty. The crime-fighting plan also demonstrates an unusual consensus between federal and state officials and among the country's three main political parties, which have been taking bitter shots at each other recently over a controversial proposal to save a government-sponsored bank. Josefina Recano de Nava, whose 28-year-old son who was killed by kidnappers, made a public plea to Zedillo and government officials to fulfill their promises. ``Why should we teach our children to be good,'' she asked, ``if at any moment they could lose their lives because of crime?''
------------------------------------------------------------------- The Witness (A Fascinating Article In 'Eye' Magazine In Toronto Says John Winter Has Been Poisoned By His Life In The Drug-Soaked American Prison System - His Case Is A Warning To Canadians Because Trends In American Crime And Punishment Are Steadily Creeping Into Canada, Including The Enforced Drugging Of Prisoners) Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 15:00:29 EDT From: Carey Ker (firstname.lastname@example.org) Subject: Canada: The witness To: email@example.com Delivery-Receipt-To: Carey Ker (firstname.lastname@example.org) Newshawk: Carey Ker Source: eye Magazine (Toronto, Canada) Pubdate: Thursday, August 27, 1998 Page: 9 Section: Street Level Website: http://www.eye.net Contact: email@example.com Author: Tom Lyons The witness Poisoned by a life spent in the drug-soaked American prison system, John Winter is home with a warning BY TOM LYONS "It's all the toxins in my system. That's why I ramble." John Winter is sitting at the table of his cluttered Parkdale apartment, apologizing for straying off topic each time he tries to relate another horror story from his years of psychotropic drug therapy in the prisons of New Jersey. More often than not, the digressions consist of cooking instructions to his wife, Lori, who is trying her best to make the pasta sauce for the evening meal. Occasionally, the tattooed ex-convict lurches off into a tangled web of conspiracy theories (involving the CIA, Roy Cohn, gangsters, corrupt judges, Donald Trump, General MacArthur and powerful unnamed casino corporations) that make Oliver Stone seem like a skeptic. But eventually, the conversation circles back to drugs and American prisons. "In the United States, they got a war on everything. War on crime. War on drugs. War on poverty. War on this. War on that. Whatever the problem is, they call it a war. That's their political mentality. So if there's a 'war on drugs,' there's no room for negotiation. 'We are at war,' you know? And it just doesn't work." Some might disagree with this view of the American criminal justice system, which Winter has also been voicing at prison reform meetings around town. And they are free to question the usefulness of listening to a man whose conversations, by his own admission, tend to slide sideways. But no one can deny that Winter has first-hand experience of trends in American crime and punishment that are steadily creeping into Canada -- including the enforced drugging of prisoners. TOXIC OVERLOAD Born in Toronto in 1957, Winter moved with his family to New Jersey in 1961. He started getting into trouble with the law at an early age, and spent much of the '70s in and out of youth correction centres on robbery charges. The situation reached the breaking point on the night of Aug. 27, 1981. Winter entered a New Jersey convenience store, brandished a kitchen knife and ordered the girl behind the counter to hand over all the bills in the cash register. As he left the store, he paused at the doorway and said, "You can press the alarm now." She did, and Winter was quickly arrested and re-imprisoned. At his trial, the defence psychiatrist, Dr. Kuvin, testified that Winter was a compulsive user of both street drugs and pharmaceutical pills, and was so high on amphetamines, alcohol and Sodium Amytol during the commission of his crime that he was operating under "diminished capacity" and therefore not legally responsible for his actions. The jury rejected his argument. The judge, noting Winter's numerous earlier convictions and incarcerations for armed robbery, sentenced the 25-year-old to 10-to-40 years in prison, with the recommendation that he receive psychiatric treatment for his emotional problems and drug dependency. The psychiatrists in the New Jersey prison system decided that the best cure for Winter's drug addiction was... still more drugs. And so the returning customer began gulping down an impressive selection of psychotropic pills, while at the same time surreptitiously wolfing down the illicit drugs that were readily available in prison. The toxic overload eventually produced a complete meltdown. "By 1985, John was unable to hold the simplest of conversations as he continuously forgot what it was being discussed. He staggered and was mentally sluggish.... [His] brain was so entrenched with chemicals that he was unable to formulate and complete an entire sentence," wrote Dr. Paul Lehrhaupt in a 1993 letter to the New Jersey State Parole Board. "Dr. Wolffe, [D.O.C. psychologist], suggested to John's mother Erika that John might never recover." Terrified by the mental and physical deterioration of her son, Mrs. Winter wrote letters to the prison doctors, New Jersey Senator Bassano, the ACLU and the Governor's Office, requesting Winter's medical files be released and the psychotropic drug therapy halted. "Michael Cole (Governor Kean's Chief Counsel) was able to assist us and dissuaded the pertinent parties to cease this therapy [in the late '80s]," she noted in a 1995 letter to prison authorities. The main topic of that letter was a slightly different but not unrelated matter: her son had been diagnosed with liver disease as a result of years of drug abuse, and she wanted to know if something could be done about it. Apparently not. After being paroled and deported back to Canada in 1996, Winter was told by doctors that his liver disease "will progressively worsen," and that he was also suffering from disease-related "fatigue and mental confusion." His intestines had pushed out through his stomach muscles, leaving him wih a protruding, discolored belly button the size of a baseball, and he was repeatedly hospitalized for internal bleeding. Declared medically unfit to work, he was placed on Family Benefits. THE THORAZINE SHUFFLE Winter still shudders at the recollection of the toxic abyss he fell into during the '80s. "Thorazine -- we called it the Thorazine shuffle, because automatically people begin to shuffle back and forth. They begin a pattern of repetitiveness, over and over and over again. Now there's other drugs: Haldol, Triavil, Trilaphon, Dalmane, Artane, Valium, Dilantin, Phenobarbitol. Eventually, I won't take no phone calls. I won't speak to no one no more. The reason why, the hair growth on my beard was down to here. Howard Hughes. Fingernails long as hell. And I couldn't remember more than three words at a time." But some sort of pharmaceutical escape had initially seemed like a blessing, because life in Trenton and Rahway State Prisons was so violent and unpredictable that anything could happen. "In the early days, you have to prove yourself. The first year, I was stabbed twice in the stomach, on two separate occasions. Another time, I walked ahead of a guy this gang thought was coming down the stairs. The guy was taking too long to get down the stairs, so I passed him. Now, the first person they see coming around the corner, they're going to throw the detergent on. The detergent is so strong, it blinds you. There's nothing you can do. It almost suffocated me. Now, I go down, they still don't recognize who I am. The cutting begins. My back gets sliced up. My arms get sliced up. My face gets sliced up. When I was finally down and out, they used a deck brush on me." And as the war on drugs escalated on the outside, life inside Rahway became even more violent and drug-ridden. "They were double and triple bunking everybody," says Lori, recalling the astronomical rise in the prison population during the '80s. "And then they were making dormitories. They just shoved a bunch of crackheads in there with bunk beds. And people were getting stabbed, and knifed, because no one was even safe from the other inmates. "And there were guards in this place doing anything to get the buck. It made it easier for [the inmates] to get anything they wanted, whether it be weapons, whether it be guns, whether it be drugs." THE WAR ON DRUGS MEETS PRISONS ON DRUGS Winter's case might seem irrelevant to any discussion of the dangers of treating prisoners with psychotropic drugs, since, by his own admission, he was also taking street drugs while incarcerated. (Indeed, his prison medical records contain not only numerous prescriptions for psychotropic drugs, but also positive urine tests for cocaine, cannabis and opiates.) But two crucial things should be noted. First, in the opinion of at least one doctor, it was the prescribed, rather than the prohibited, drugs that were chiefly responsible for both Winter's deteriorating health and his initial descent into substance abuse and criminality. "John's crimes did not derive from greed or malicious intent. For most of his life he had maintained an addiction to prescribed pharmaceutical drugs which contributed significantly to his anti-social behavior," wrote Dr. Lehrhaupt in his 1993 letter to the parole board. Second, the very fact that Winter's case presents a murky mixture of street drugs and pharmaceuticals should be seen as indicative of an obvious and inherent danger -- rather than an unforseen complication -- in the use of psychotropic drug therapy in prison; as Patrick Arvonio, the former superintendent of Rahway concedes, the entire U.S. prison system is hopelessly overrun with illicit narcotics. "Nobody can convince me that there's a county jail, a prison or any other place where people are locked up where there aren't drugs," Arvonio told Prison Life magazine in 1996. And if Rahway State Prison in the '80s is any indication, drug addicted prisoners in general are likely to combine the two classes of drugs whenever possible. "All the guys I hung out with mixed them," recalls Winter. "It's like mixing alcohol with Valium. It doubles the effect." Other ex-inmates agree. In a phone interview, Jim A., a parolee who was incarcerated at Rahway during the '80s, stated that the distribution of psychotropic drugs to the inmates was merely the final touch needed to turn the prison into junkie heaven. "If they call the medication out, over the loudspeaker, and if you happen to be in the hallway, you would get stampeded. These guys run for the stuff. It's nuts. It's like a race. These guys really want this stuff. And I've seen guys, like, you go into their cells, and they save their medication and you wouldn't believe some of the pills they have. All different types, you know? It's common to put people on all different types of medication. And probably not even care about how one interacts with the other." Jim added that nobody, including the prison medical officials, seemed particularly concerned about the long-term consequences of psychotropic drug therapy in such a chaotic setting. "A lot of these guys get on this medication because it's easier to deal with being there. But for the most part, guys taking the medication have no concept of what this medication is doing to you. They take this medication, they think it's helping them with their emotional problems and whatnot. And the bottom line is, it's screwing up their insides," said Jim. "They stopped shock treating you because it became illegal, and then they started medicating [the inmates to control them]. And pretty much what they're doing, basically, is killing people." IT'S NOT TOO LATE A couple of months later, Winter is slumped at the kitchen table in his Parkdale apartment, talking about the latest gloomy prognosis from the doctors, while Lori rifles through photocopies of his medical files. He has been in and out of hospital, and is also facing charges of wife assault, stemming from a domestic dispute in July. But on this August evening, the couple is mainly concerned with documenting the horrors of the psychotropic drug treatments in the New Jersey prison system a decade earlier. "It's very hard to watch someone you love go through that, and not have any power to stop it," says Lori, thinking back to those days. "It was a very hard time." And though it may be too late to save John Winter, it is is not too late to learn from his misfortune. If one returning Canadian has the courage to lay out his tangled story of drug abuse in American prisons, perhaps the rest of Canada owes it -- if not to him, then at least to ourselves -- to ensure that similar catastrophes are not brewing in our own prison system.
------------------------------------------------------------------- Panama's Vote Could Affect US Drug Fight ('The Miami Herald' Says That If, As Some Pollsters Predict, Panamanian Voters On Sunday Reject A Constitutional Change That Would Allow President Ernesto Perez Balladares To Run For Reelection, They Will Also Kill The Last Faint Chance For The United States To Maintain A Military 'Anti-Drug' Presence In Panama Beyond 2000)Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 15:31:49 -0700 From: firstname.lastname@example.org (MAPNews) To: email@example.com Subject: MN: US: Panama's Vote Could Affect U.S. Drug Fight Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org Reply-To: email@example.com Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: isenberd@DynCorp.com (Isenberg, David) Source: Miami Herald (FL) Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org Website: http://www.herald.com/ Pubdate: Thu, 27 Aug 1998 Author: Glenn Garvin and Andres Oppenheimer Herald Staff Writers PANAMA'S VOTE COULD AFFECT U.S. DRUG FIGHT PANAMA -- If Panamanian voters on Sunday reject a constitutional change that would allow President Ernesto Perez Balladares to run for reelection, as some pollsters predict, they may kill more than his hopes to remain in power. They may also destroy the last faint chance for a continued U.S. military presence in Panama beyond 2000. The proposal to keep 2,000 U.S. troops here after the Panama Canal comes under local control on the last day of 1999 is already nearly dead. But, officials in both Washington and Panama City say, defeat of the constitutional amendment would probably yank out the final life-support tubes. ``If Perez Balladares loses, you're just going to have political chaos in Panama,'' said one U.S. official. ``And an agreement like this one is hard enough to negotiate when things are calm.'' The constitutional amendment on Sunday's ballot would allow presidents to serve two consecutive terms in office, a practice now banned. A poll last week by the opposition newspaper La Prensa showed it losing by nearly 20 percentage points. The referendum may well turn out to be much closer than the poll indicates. The president's supporters are much better organized than the opposition, and are expected to do a much better job of getting out the vote. But Perez Balladares must be considered an underdog as the weekend approaches. '99 race could start Monday That spells bad news for an agreement on U.S. troops. Not only would a defeat Sunday leave Perez Balladares a lame duck, but it would touch off an immediate scramble by politicians in every party -- including the president's own -- for position in next May's presidential election. ``If he loses the referendum, Perez Balladares will still be president,'' said one U.S. official. ``If he wanted to come back to the table, he could. But any agreement he reaches will have to be ratified by the Panamanian Congress. Will he still be able to control it? Maybe. Are any of the opposition parties going to let him negotiate in peace? No. Will the presidential candidate of his party like it? Doubtful.'' Leaving negotiations to the next president would pose a huge problem. Any successor to Perez Balladares would not take office until September 1999, less than four months before the last U.S.soldier must leave Panama under the terms of the 1977 canal treaty. Nevertheless, added another U.S. official: ``There may still be a chance to salvage it . . . We continue to be interested in the process of talking [on a troop agreement] irrespective of the outcome of the referendum.'' Troops agreement unlikely Even if Perez Balladares wins, any deal on maintaining U.S. forces remains a long shot. ``I think [negotiations] are in a very difficult period,'' Perez Balladares admitted in an interview with The Herald. His foreign minister, Ricardo Alberto Arias, was even more blunt: ``Unless something changes drastically, I don't see a future for the negotiations.'' Of course, drastic change has been the rule rather than the exception in the roller-coaster negotiations over the U.S. troops. The talks, declared all but dead several times since they began informally early in the decade, led to an agreement announced by both sides last December. But that deal -- for an international anti-narcotics base that would include about 2,000 U.S. military personnel -- began unraveling just two weeks later. The United States says Panama backed out of a done deal. Panama says the United States tried to sneak into the final draft of the agreement several points that had not been negotiated. Talks resumed but grew more rancorous at every session. In July, U.S. spokesman James Rubin announced they were ``at an impasse'' and the United States would start looking for a different location for the anti-narcotics base. `Other missions' in dispute The controversy centers on two things: Washington's insistence that U.S. forces attached to the anti-narcotics center be permitted to engage in unspecified ``other missions,'' and Panamanian insistence that the 12-year agreement include an escape clause that would let either side back out after just three years. Panamanian officials say a compromise is probably possible on the length of the agreement, but not on the ``other missions'' clause. ``That's the root of the problem,'' Perez Balladares told The Herald. The United States keeps wanting to be able to carry out `other missions,' and we keep saying, what other missions?'' U.S. officials say the Panamanian objection is unwarranted. The United States simply wants to be able to fly supplies to its embassies around the region from Panama, or to carry out humanitarian search-and-rescue missions at sea, they say. ``Great, that can be done through an administrative accord,'' said Perez Balladares. ``They can take a hangar at Tocumen International Airport and fill it up with all the papers and Coca-Cola that they want, and send it out from there. ``But why do these missions have to be part of a center that is supposed to be exclusively for the fight against drug trafficking? `Other missions' could be interpreted as them wanting to mount spy missions against us, or who knows what.'' The president's unspoken fear, his aides say, is that a U.S. invasion of some other Latin American country could someday be staged from Panama under the ``other missions'' clause. Herald staff writer Don Bohning contributed to this report. Herald staff writers Glenn Garvin and Andres Oppenheimer can be reached by e-mail at email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org
------------------------------------------------------------------- Police Accused Of Marijuana Trafficking ('The Age' In Australia Says The Melbourne Magistrates Court Was Told Wednesday That Three Detectives From The Victoria Police Organised Crime Squad And A City Patrol Group Sergeant Trafficked In Marijuana Seized During A Drug Raid) Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 20:33:27 -0700 From: email@example.com (MAPNews) To: firstname.lastname@example.org Subject: MN: Australia: Police Accused Of Marijuana Trafficking Sender: email@example.com Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/ Newshawk: Ken Russell Source: Age, The (Australia) Contact: email@example.com Website: http://www.theage.com.au Pubdate: 27 Aug 1998 Author: Steve Butcher POLICE ACCUSED OF MARIJUANA TRAFFICKING Three detectives from the Victoria Police organised crime squad and a city patrol group sergeant trafficked in marijuana seized during a drug raid, a court was told yesterday. The Melbourne Magistrates Court heard one detective gave part of the nine-kilogram marijuana haul to a colleague who gave it to a drug dealer. Detective Inspector Dennis O'Bryan, of the corruption investigation division of the ethical standards department, alleged Sergeant Michael George Redford gave the marijuana to the dealer. Mr O'Bryan said the Sunshine dealer sold the marijuana for $8000 and paid Sergeant Redford $6000, some of which was allegedly given to his three colleagues. Sergeant Redford, 43, of the city patrol group, Detective Sergeant Robert John Sodomaco, 38, Detective Senior Constable Scott Poynder, 31, and Detective Senior Constable Roger Ian Grant, 35, all of the organised crime squad, were arrested yesterday. They were suspended with pay and face charges of trafficking, conspiracy to traffic, possession and theft of marijuana. The prosecutor, Ms Luisa Di Pietrantonio, told the court bail could be set for the men once they had shown that their further detention was not justified. Mr O'Bryan said the three detectives seized the marijuana and hydroponic equipment when they executed search warrants on two houses in Airport West on 13 March. He said the detectives stole the marijuana the same day and gave some of it to Sergeant Redford who gave some to the dealer. Questioned by Mr Tony Hargreaves, for the detectives, Mr O'Bryan said there was no concern the men would fail to appear, he was not seeking reporting conditions and that each man had no prior convictions. He told Mr Tony Isaacs, for Sergeant Redford, the dealer was given about 20 ounces of green, wet marijuana including heads, branches and stems. Mr O'Bryan said the dealer sold the marijuana for $8000 and alleged Sergeant Redford received $6000 in return. Mr Hargreaves told the magistrate, Mr Brian Barrow, the men would not face trial until about the end of next year and their time in custody would be spent in isolation. Mr Barrow, in granting bail in the men's own undertaking, said they would contest the charges and ordered them not to contact prosecution witnesses. They will appear again on 12 November. -------------------------------------------------------------------
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 the 1998 Daily News index for August 27-September 2
to Portland NORML news archive directory
to 1998 Daily News index (long)
This URL: http://www.pdxnorml.org/980827.html