Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:27:59 -0700

Subject:Peter McWilliam Memorial Vigil Up TOC

 From Lanny Swerdlow <PROBER13@aol.com>

PLEASE JOIN US on a day long trip to Los Angeles to participate in The Second
Annual Peter McWilliams Memorial Vigil which will be held this Saturday June
15, 2002 from 1 p.m. - 6 p.m. In addition to this Vigil we will also be going
to the site of the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource Center to show our support
for the Hunger Strike being conducted there. Information on both of these
issues as well as car pooling to Los Angeles for this day of solidarity in
the medical marijuana movement is listed below.

The Peter McWilliams Memorial Vigil is a simultaneous statewide rally in San
Diego, Los Angeles and San Francisco and will call attention to the federal
government's ongoing war on medical marijuana patients and the dangers of the
drug war. It is being coordinated by the California Political Prisoner
Support Committee of the Libertarian Party.

The vigil commemorates the life and death of Peter McWilliams. McWilliams was
an AIDS patient who used marijuana for appetitite stimulation and control of
nausea caused by his other AIDS medications. He became a Medical Marijuana
Activist writing a number of books on the subject and helped in the
cultivation of marijuana for distribution through Medical Marijuana Clubs.
This came to the attention of federal authorities who arrested him in 1997
for cultivating marijuana. His mother and brother put up their homes for
collateral for the $250,000 bond needed to keep Peter from being held in
prison while awaiting trial. As a condition of the bail, Peter could not use
marijuana or he would forfeit his bail and his mother and brother would lose
their homes. One night, alone at home, unable to use marijuana to control his
nausea, he choked to death on his own vomit. Many in the movement believe the
government, by denying McWilliams the use of marijuana, is responsible for
his death. For more information on Peter McWilliams, go to
www.petermcwilliams.org.

The vigil in Los Angeles will be in front of the Federal Building , 11000
Wilshire Blvd. from 1:00 PM until 6.00 PM. Additional information on this
rally can be obtained by  contacting Hal Chiprin at hallucy@webtv.net or
805-653-1999.

In addition to the vigil at the Federal Building, we will also visit the Los
Angeles Cannabis Resource Center to show our support for their ongoing Hunger
Strike and Vigil being conducted at the site. Last October, armed Drug
Enforcement Administration agents raided the Los Angeles Cannabis Resource
Center (LACRC), a medical marijuana dispensary and support center in West
Hollywood, seizing patient records and forcing 960 clients -- mostly people
with AIDS or cancer -- to turn to criminal street sources for their medicine.

Since LACRC's closure, two dozen members have died, several have been
robbed trying to acquire marijuana on the black market, and almost all
have reported problems eating, sleeping, and keeping their meds down.

Apparently that wasn't enough pain and suffering for the federal government.
The Bush administration has now moved to seize LACRC's building, and
prosecutions of staff members -- for the "crime" of providing safe,
affordable medicine to the sick -- are expected shortly.

But LACRC's members, friends, and supporters are fighting back. With the
backing of local elected officials (including the city of West Hollywood,
which helped LACRC purchase its building), they have announced a "Summer of
Resistance" vigil to demand an end to this cruel persecution of medical
marijuana patients and providers.

With an encampment established at the LACRC site at 7494 Santa Monica Blvd.
(near Gardener) in West Hollywood, a group of patients and staff fasted for
six days. They have already gained significant local media attention,
including extensive local TV coverage and a Los Angeles Times story
(http://www.mpp.org/news/lt060602.html). The vigil continues, and the fast
will resume this coming weekend if efforts by local elected officials to
intervene on LACRC's behalf are unsuccessful.

This will be an extraordinary day of support for medical marijuana patients
and the right of California citizens to determine what is appropriate for
their own health and welfare as decided by California voters when they
approved Proposition 215 in 1996. We are organizing a car pool to go to Los
Angeles on June 15 and if anyone would like to join us and/or can offer rides
to others, please email me back or phone me at 760-799-2055.

This is an opportunity to meet many of the activists in the movement and to
make your statement of support for this humanitarian cause and individual
civil liberties. It is a day that will allow you to stand up as an American
citizen and exercise your constitutional rights to let the public know how
our federal government is acting to overturn the vote of California citizens
to allow patients who have a doctor's recomendation to utitilize mairjuana
for medical purposes. It is a day that you will not forget and will be proud
to have been a participant.

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:38:52 -0700

Subject:CA State High Court Weighs Medical Marijuana Law Up TOC

Pubdate: Wed, 05 Jun 2002
Source: Sacramento Bee (CA)
Webpage: http://www.sacbee.com/content/politics/story/3121680p-4142029c.html
Copyright: 2002 The Sacramento Bee
Contact: opinion@sacbee.com
Website: http://www.sacbee.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/376
Author: Claire Cooper, Bee Legal Affairs Writer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?115 (Cannabis - California)

STATE HIGH COURT WEIGHS MEDICAL MARIJUANA LAW

LOS ANGELES -- Taking up California's medical marijuana initiative for the
first time, the state Supreme Court showed strong interest Tuesday in
making the law work more smoothly for patients who come under police
scrutiny and no interest in following the lead of disapproving federal
authorities.
During oral arguments in an appeal of a Tuolumne County man, the justices
concentrated on working out a procedure for legitimate pot users to get off
the hook early.
Proposition 215, passed in 1996, said seriously ill patients using
marijuana on a doctor's recommendation are "not subject to
prosecution,"
noted Chief Justice Ronald George. He asked, "Does that not imply one
does
not have to run the gamut" of the criminal justice system -- from
arrest to
jury verdict?
Deputy Attorney General Maureen Daly, who urged the court to uphold Myron
Mower's criminal conviction for growing 31 marijuana plants, said the
initiative meant only that legitimate pot users are "not subject to
successful prosecution" -- meaning they have only a right to persuade a
jury to give them a break.
But Justice Carlos Moreno pointed to other references in the initiative's
text that supported George's interpretation and appeared to provide
legitimate users immunity from prosecution.
In ruling against Mower, the Court of Appeal relied on conflicting language
in the voter's ballot pamphlet.
The Supreme Court is using the case to set enforcement rules for
Proposition 215, which did not answer key questions: What must legitimate
patients do to stay out of jail, and how much pot is permissible?
The justices' review coincides with a dramatic increase in federal raids on
medical marijuana dispensaries following a series of defeats for
Proposition 215 in the federal courts.
But while federal law enforcement concentrates on what it views as drug
trafficking, the gravely ill patients who were the focus of Proposition 215
are much more likely to come in contact with local authorities and state
courts, as Mower did. In most of their cases, the state Supreme Court's
word will be final.
Blind and suffering from end-stage diabetes, Mower has used marijuana to
control nausea and vomiting. He was placed on probation for growing it in
1993 and convicted again in 1998, two years after passage of Proposition
215. He again was placed on probation, fined and, according to his court
brief, forced to do without the only drug that works for him. He is now
unable to keep food down and has wasting syndrome, his lawyers say.
After the initiative passed, Mower claims he told both the Probation
Department and the sheriff he would resume growing the weed but did not
wish to violate the terms of his probation. For a while all went smoothly.
County officers who visited him in February 1997 found seven pot plants but
left him alone.
They returned that July, however, and found 31 plants. Some experts in the
case testified that was less than a year's supply, but Daly told the
Supreme Court on Tuesday that Mower "had way more than for personal
use."
The officers seized 28 of the plants and arrested Mower under a three-plant
limit the sheriff had adopted. No one had told Mower about the new rule,
defense lawyer Gerald Uelmen said Tuesday.
The sheriff's policy is one of a hodgepodge of guidelines that permit
medical pot users in some counties to grow enough plants for a steady
supply while users elsewhere face strict limits or no standards at all.
Mower "wouldn't be here" appealing a conviction if he lived in
Sonoma or
Del Norte counties, where the limit is 99 plants, Uelmen told the justices.
But then there are defendants like Mower, who was put through what his
lawyers called a "physically agonizing three-day trial," in which
he bore
the burden of proving he was a legitimate medical user. Though his doctor
supported him, the jury was not convinced.
Uelmen is urging the Supreme Court to adopt a procedure that would bar
criminal charges if a patient shows he has a doctor's recommendation and a
reasonable supply of pot. If the case goes to trial, the lawyer said, then
the prosecution should have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the pot
use isn't legitimate.
Mower's is one of about 25 Proposition 215 cases to reach the appellate
court, according to the state Attorney General's Office. So far the only
reported appellate decision on permissible quantities came in a case
involving 2 pounds of marijuana seized in a traffic stop in Contra Costa
County. The Court of Appeal in San Francisco said the quantity, as well as
the "method, timing and distance of transportation" all depend on
what's
reasonably necessary for the patient's current medical needs.
But that case was dropped before any court defined what "current"
means,
and the justices made little headway Tuesday.
"That day, that month or what?" asked George. The answer could be
critical
in cases like Mower's. The court's ruling is expected within three months.
Meanwhile, both houses of the Legislature have passed a
law-enforcement-backed bill, SB 187, to set statewide enforcement standards
and procedures for Proposition 215. But the author says the governor's
office has advised him not to send it to Davis' desk.
Sen. John Vasconcellos, D-Santa Clara, said he had no clue about the
governor's misgivings.
A Davis press aide said the governor has not taken official position on the
bill, adding that Davis is looking for evidence of the efficacy of medical
marijuana.
__________________________________________________________________________
Distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 17:10:50 -0700

Subject:OR: Bushwhacked! - Oregon won't let pot-smokers behind the wheel. Up TOC

Newshawk: "Phil Smith" <phil@voterpower.org>
Source: Willamette Week
Web site: http://www.wweek.com
Address: 822 SW 10th Ave., Portland, OR 97205
Contact: mzusman@wweek.com
Copyright: 2002 Willamette Week
Phone: 503-243-2122
Fax: 503-243-1115
Pubdate: Wednesday, June 12, 2002
Byline: Brittany Schaeffer


Bushwhacked! - Oregon won't let pot-smokers behind the wheel.

Two months ago, Joel Foster and his business partner, Rick Schneider, took 
advantage of one of the first warm days of spring by heading to a favorite 
fishing hole on the Wilson River near the Oregon Coast. The pair of 
independent contractors had started out early that morning, hiking from 
Schneider's house near Rockaway Beach with rods, sandwiches and two joints. 
As the fishing slowed in the afternoon, Foster and Schneider decided to try 
their hand at catching a buzz.

"We were just sitting there smoking a joint," recalls Foster, 44, "fishing 
and having a good time." But the relaxing day assumed a dismal cast when 
Oregon State Trooper Lalo Guerra crashed through the bushes. The officer, 
who had been spying on the pair, demanded to see their fishing licenses. 
Satisfied that they were angling legally, he then confronted them about the 
funny cigarettes he'd seen them smoking. Foster and Schneider admitted that 
they had consumed about a joint-and-a-half and handed over the remainder of 
the marijuana. Because the contents of the blunt were less than an ounce, 
the cop gave each a citation carrying a $585 fine and instructed them to 
either pay the ticket by mail or to fight it in court.

Thinking that his punishment ended with the fine, Foster paid up and wrote 
it off as a loss. Schneider, however, decided to go to court, hoping to get 
the fine reduced. Instead, Neil Lemery, a Tillamook County justice of the 
peace, informed Schneider that, in addition to the fine (which he wouldn't 
reduce), the two men would face a mandatory six-month suspension of their 
driver's licenses.

Although Schneider argued that he and Foster were not even in the vicinity 
of a vehicle when they were caught with the marijuana, Lemery remained unmoved.

In early May, the two men each received a letter from the state Driver and 
Motor Vehicle Services, stating that in addition to the license suspension, 
they could not apply for hardship permits. Such permits are commonly issued 
to drivers convicted of motor-vehicle offenses, granting offenders with 
suspended licenses the right to drive to and from work. However, the 1991 
Legislature passed a law prohibiting hardship permits for drug 
offenders--even those such as Foster and Schneider whose pot violations had 
nothing to do with driving.

"The ironic thing is, you can get drunk, smash up your car and get back on 
the road," says Foster. "I know guys who have gotten three DUIIs and are 
still legally driving [with a hardship permit]."

Over the past three years, DMV records show, the state has issued 3,333 
hardship permits to convicted drunk drivers. During that same period, the 
state suspended 6,227 drug offenders' licenses. None of those drivers could 
apply for a hardship permit.

The Drug Offenders Driving Privileges Suspension Act of 1991 enjoyed large 
bipartisan support at the time and passed with only two dissenting votes in 
the House. One naysayer was Carl Hosticka, who then represented south 
Eugene. Now a Metro councilor, Hosticka says he still believes that the law 
is inappropriate. "This appears to be an overly hard reaction to minor drug 
offenses--without much opportunity for recourse," he says. "It's punishing 
people more than once." Foster and Schneider's situation, he says, "is the 
kind of thing we were anticipating. This punitive response doesn't do 
anyone any good--and, in fact, has the potential for harm."

Even one of the bill's co-sponsors now questions the law. "We were trying 
to find alternative methods to sanction people," says Kevin Mannix, the GOP 
gubernatorial candidate who, in 1991, was a Democratic state rep from 
Salem. "However, it serves no public purpose to take away someone's license 
for a minor drug offense. It just doesn't make sense."

According to the legal community, the suspension of a driver's license 
after a pot bust is the exception rather than the rule, but it does happen.

"When the Legislature writes a law that says 'shall suspend the license,' 
that means that I have to do it--and I will," says Lemery.

For Foster, that means asking family members and friends to shuttle him to 
and from jobs until November, a hassle he expects will cut his business in 
half. "I'm doing everything I can just to hold on for the next six months," 
he says.

In addition, the suspension will almost certainly cause Foster's 
auto-insurance costs to spike--and probably result in the cancellation of 
his policy, according to Jeff Aeschliman of Farmers Insurance. Foster's 
attorney, James Glover, says it makes no sense to hurt his client's ability 
to work just because he smoked a joint on a hiking trail. "In this case, 
enforcing this law is outrageous, and may be unconstitutional, because it 
interferes with his right to travel and his right to make a living," says 
Glover, a Portland criminal-defense litigator. Foster is currently 
considering challenging the law in court--all of which seems a long way 
from the Wilson River.

"All I had was a joint with really crappy leaf," he says. "If I'd known 
this was going to happen, I would have thrown it in the river."

- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attachment: http://www.drugsense.org/temp/part214.html

 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 17:22:19 -0700

Subject:Canada: Its His Right To Toke, Hemp Store Owner Says Up TOC

Title: Its His Right To Toke, Hemp Store Owner Says
Author: Dan Palmer, Edmonton Sun
Source: Edmonton Sun
Contact: sun.letters@ccinet.ab.ca
Website: http://www.canoe.ca/EdmontonSun/
Pubdate: Friday, June 7, 2002

A co-owner of True North Hemp arrested by cops claims it's his right to
smoke marijuana and he doesn't believe he should have to get a medical
exemption to smoke it.

"It's the price I have to pay for my belief," said Troy Stewart, 31,
referring to his recent arrest and marijuana charges. "I don't feel I need
to seek anybody's permission (to smoke marijuana). It's my body. I don't
like doctors."

Around noon Wednesday as Stewart was preparing some porridge for lunch,
cops knocked on the door of his home near 104 Street and 84 Avenue with a
search warrant in hand.

The police Green Team - made up of city police and RCMP - later seized 12
marijuana plants with a street value of about $12,000, 100 grams of
marijuana, and about $2,000 worth of growing equipment.

Stewart claims he uses marijuana, in part, to relieve the pain from back
spasms caused by scoliosis.

He said he probably could get a medical exemption in order to smoke
marijuana for medicinal purposes, but he won't.

"I believe I have the right to administer my own health and I wasn't
hurting anybody else," he said, adding his constitutional rights have been
violated.

Stewart is scheduled to appear in court in Edmonton on June 26 to face
charges of production of marijuana and possession for the purpose of
trafficking.

Copyright Canoe Limited Partnership.



 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 20:12:03 -0700

Subject:U.S. Drug Czar Warns Canada on Plan Up TOC

U.S. Drug Czar Warns Canada on Plan

.c The Associated Press

QUEBEC (AP) - Canada should get tough on marijuana instead of decriminalizing
the drug or allowing people to use it for medicinal purposes, U.S. drug
policy chief John Walters said Wednesday.

``Canada's decision about how it handles this or other issues of regulated
substance is its decision. We respect that,'' Walters told reporters during a
two-day visit for an international meeting of the College on Problems of Drug
Dependence.

But he made it clear the American government disagrees with recent moves in
Canada to liberalize drug policies.

More than 250 Canadians have federal government clearance to smoke marijuana
for medical reasons. Canada amended drug laws last year to allow patients
with conditions such as HIV, cancer, and multiple sclerosis to use marijuana
legally.

Walters said there were better ways to treat patients than smoking marijuana.

A Canadian Senate committee has expressed initial support for decriminalizing
marijuana, with its final report due in August following public hearings. A
preliminary report released in May said no scientific evidence exists that
marijuana use leads to harder drugs, or that it is more dangerous to society
than alcohol.

Canadian federal agencies spend about $326 million each year to fight drugs
and more than 30,000 people are charged with simple possession annually, the
preliminary report said.

If Canada follows the committee's initial recommendations, marijuana would
still be illegal, but users would not be penalized. That would differ from
the zero tolerance policy of the U.S. government.

Walters, the director of the White House Office of National Drug Control
Policy, said that of the 4.3 million Americans suffering drug addiction, 65
percent are dependent on marijuana.

Liberal drug laws in Canada would be a concern for the United States, Walters
said.

``It certainly could become a problem if the trade is able to use our borders
as a vehicle to enhance their effectiveness to move drugs across the
border,'' he said of drug smugglers.



 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 16:45:32 -0700

Subject:CA: Berkeley Pot Club Closes After Robbery Up TOC

 From Dale Gieringer

Pot club closes following robbery
By David Scharfenberg, Daily Planet Staff (06-12-02) (Berkeley, CA)
Club aims to protect public, patients and marijuana as medicine

The University Avenue medicinal marijuana club that was robbed last week 
for the third time in a year closed its doors permanently Tuesday.

"We wanted to make sure that we weren't putting patients at risk, and we 
wanted to keep neighbors safe," said Berkeley Medical Herbs office manager 
Dorrit Geshuri.

The club, which has attracted a spate of negative publicity with the 
robberies, was closed also because the club wanted to protect the medicinal 
marijuana movement and the other four pot clubs in town, Geshuri said.

The financial losses incurred in the robberies did not play a role in the 
closure, she said.

"I think it's a responsible decision," said City Councilmember Linda Maio, 
who had vowed to shut down Medical Herbs after last week's robbery.

The heist took place Wednesday afternoon when two Latino men said they knew 
owner Ken Estes then forced their way into the club, brandishing a gun and 
a knife.

The robbers told everyone to lie on the ground and made off with about 
$1,500 in cash and over a pound of marijuana, valued at $3,500.

After a December robbery, neighbors and city officials raised concerns 
about security on site and the safety of residents. The club responded by 
shortening its hours of operation, hiring a licensed security guard and 
installing cameras, among other measures.

The club was considering additional measures, Geshuri said, when the June 5 
robbery occurred.

The Medical Herbs ownership announced the closure in a weekly meeting of 
the Alliance of Berkeley Patients, an umbrella group for the dispensaries 
in town.

Don Duncan, who operates Berkeley Patients Group, another marijuana club, 
welcomed the decision.

"I think in this instance, it's for the best," he said, noting that he 
would normally be upset with the move because there is "safety in numbers" 
for a movement under constant political pressure.

Duncan said he is pleased that the Medical Herbs management is committed to 
putting patients in touch with other clubs.

"The patients will be taken care of," he said. "That's great."

"I am so grateful that the management of that group has decided to shut its 
doors," said City Councilmember Dona Spring. "Public safety comes first."

Spring argued that the decision will serve the medicinal marijuana movement 
in Berkeley. By pre-empting new robberies, she said, the closure will help 
prevent neighbors of other clubs from becoming overly concerned.

"My reaction is one of relief," added Mayor Shirley Dean. "I think it was a 
good decision on their part, a responsible decision."

Several neighbors made efforts to close down the club in the wake of the 
robberies. But Geshuri said most have been supportive.

Stan Eby, who manages a number of apartments on University Avenue, said a 
drug store and meat market that used to be in the neighborhood were robbed 
far more often than the pot club. He said he was sad to see Medical Herbs go.

"It's a shame that it's closing up," he said. "We need clubs like that."

Geshuri said the management of Medical Herbs may re-open as a "juice bar 
and herbal medicine establishment." The new store would not sell marijuana, 
she said.

Contact reporter at

scharfenber@berkeleydailyplanet.net

- -- 
- ----
Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858  // canorml@igc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114


 
 


**




web:     http://www.crrh.org/

------------------------------
End of Restore-Digest V2002 #107
********************************