cannabisnews.com: Pot Activists Face Federal Hurdle Pot Activists Face Federal Hurdle Posted by CN Staff on September 26, 2002 at 10:22:17 PT By Jeff McDonald and Marisa Taylor, Staff Writer Source: Union Tribune Medical-marijuana activist Steve McWilliams believes the law is on his side when he dispenses pot to the sick. After all, California voters in 1996 approved Proposition 215, which allows patients to grow and use marijuana for medicinal purposes. He may not be as protected as he thinks. The federal law that prohibits the cultivation of marijuana supersedes California law – and that allows the U.S. attorney in San Diego to seek criminal charges against McWilliams. San Diego's top federal prosecutor, Carol Lam, hasn't decided whether to file charges in the case. If she decides to, legal experts say, mounting a defense in federal court would be tough. The best hope for McWilliams and other medical-marijuana patients is that individual U.S. attorneys will decide not to charge them in the first place. McWilliams, whose garden was uprooted by federal agents Tuesday, is the latest medical-marijuana patient to be weighing defense strategies. In the past year, the federal government has raided cannabis clubs in Los Angeles and Oakland; at least seven people have been charged. "This is not accident," said Stephen G. Nelson, who was a federal prosecutor in San Diego for 25 years. "Somebody in Washington, presumably the attorney general, made the decision that we are not going to allow the people of California to defy the law." The medical-marijuana community is preparing for a fight in San Diego that could have national implications. The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws plans to offer legal help to McWilliams, said R. Keith Stroup, a public-interest attorney who founded the Washington D.C.-based nonprofit group in 1970. He said three dozen California attorneys are ready to assist in the case. "We may not be able to protect him from the powers of the federal government, but we can damn well make sure he has a good lawyer," Stroup said. "And we've done that." McWilliams, 47, has spent years advocating the healing powers of marijuana. He smokes the herb to relieve pain he suffers from a 1970s motorcycle accident. The unemployed activist has brought marijuana plants into the San Diego City Council chambers to accentuate his point. Yesterday, he smoked the drug outside City Hall, where 40 or so people gathered to protest the DEA raid on his home. San Diego police stood watch but did nothing. McWilliams' belief that his personal garden is protected by Proposition 215 seemed to be bolstered by a state Supreme Court ruling last July that granted medical-marijuana patients limited immunity from prosecution. Many state and local officials support his view. Earlier this month, California Attorney General Bill Lockyer complained about the recent raids in a letter to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft and DEA Administrator Asa Hutchinson. "The decision to continue federal raids on medicinal-marijuana providers when there is no evidence that the operation is actually engaged in illicit commercial distribution is wasteful, unwise and surprisingly insensitive," Lockyer wrote. San Diego attorney Patrick Dudley, who has been plotting McWilliams' defense strategy, said the state court ruling doesn't protect Californians from being prosecuted in federal court. An earlier U.S. Supreme Court ruling said medical need cannot be used in a defense against marijuana charges in federal court, no matter what state law has approved. "Because of the way federal law is right now, it's a pretty straightforward case for them, unfortunately," Dudley said. 'Jury nullification' One possible defense strategy would be to persuade a jury to acquit medical-marijuana activists even if the federal government's evidence against them is overwhelming. This tactic, known as "jury nullification," has been used by draft dodgers and tax protesters to argue they should be acquitted because the laws under which they were prosecuted are misguided. San Diego defense attorney Michael Pancer said that tactic usually fails, because judges carefully instruct jurors to follow the law, not their hearts. "The jurors cry and say they don't want to convict – but then they do," Pancer said. Peter Nunez, a former U.S. attorney under President Reagan, said he prosecuted several people in federal court in the late 1970s for smuggling an extract of apricot pits known as Laetrile. Most of those defendants tried to argue for jury nullification because some cancer patients believed the drug helped cure the disease. Each time, they were convicted, Nunez said. Prosecutors have another edge in the McWilliams case, because they can argue he continued to violate the law after they warned him that growing and distributing marijuana was illegal. In an unusual move, the U.S. attorney notified McWilliams in a hand-delivered letter last Thursday that he would be prosecuted if he continued his activities. McWilliams said he wouldn't stop, because it was a matter of principle. Even the knowledge that a conviction could put him in prison hasn't deterred him. If tried and convicted of manufacturing marijuana, he could face up to 16 months in prison. McWilliams said he hopes the U.S. attorney's office will decide not to prosecute him. The federal government appears to have backed down in one high-profile case this month. In Santa Cruz County, dozens of federal agents had seized 100 plants and arrested several members of a medical-marijuana cooperative. A few days later, federal authorities said no charges would be filed. "It would not be a nice, easy, clean prosecution," McWilliams said. "We've been assured that if we stayed within these guidelines, we'll be protected." Stephen Nelson, the former San Diego federal prosecutor who once headed the drug division, said some jurors might view a guilty verdict as unjust. In one of the few medical-marijuana cases prosecuted in state court in San Diego, jurors in 1993 acquitted a La Mesa man who said he needed the drug to ease the symptoms of AIDS. The verdict was reached before Proposition 215 allowed medical use. "Jurors aren't stupid," said Nelson, who believes federal officials should not press charges. "There's always a chance they would hang or acquit." Civil complaint McWilliams and his partner, Barbara MacKenzie, have been lining up support from activists and lawyers throughout the nation. Gerald Uelmen, a law professor at Santa Clara University who is defending the Santa Cruz marijuana advocates, is putting together a civil complaint seeking an injunction to prevent the DEA from conducting further raids until the courts resolve the conflict between state and federal laws. "They're just engaged in hit-and-run operations, trying to close down as many (gardens) as they can," Uelmen said of the drug agents. "They just go in and grab the plants, the records and computers and then not engage in any criminal prosecution." McWilliams has received a vote of confidence from some members of a San Diego city task force that is drawing up guidelines under which chronically ill patients may use marijuana. McWilliams was a member of the task force until last month, when he quit because he felt the committee was moving too slowly. "This is a medical issue," San Diego City Councilman George Stevens said yesterday at a committee meeting attended by dozens of McWilliams supporters. "People are sick. The marijuana is needed to address their illness." The task force recommendations are scheduled to go before a City Council committee Oct. 16. San Diego police and drug-abuse prevention groups disagree on some of the suggestions. City officials estimate that between 1,500 and 3,000 people will apply for identification as registered medical-marijuana patients. The city expects to begin issuing the ID cards early next year. Meanwhile, McWilliams is bracing for a knock at his door he hopes will never come. He worries whenever helicopters pass over his rented house in Normal Heights. Before their house was raided this week, he and MacKenzie harvested the useable marijuana from their garden and divided it among five clients. "If we waited and they came, then we would lose everything," McWilliams said. "So we just tried to help as many people as we could." Note: State law not a shield to U.S. prosecution.Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)Author: Jeff McDonald and Marisa Taylor, Staff Writer Published: September 26, 2002Copyright: 2002 Union-Tribune Publishing Co.Contact: letters uniontrib.comWebsite: http://www.uniontrib.com/Related Articles:Pot Advocates Ask For City Leaders' Helphttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14248.shtmlPot Garden Uprooted in Raidhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14240.shtmlPot Grower Gets Letter of Warning from DEAhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14191.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by afterburner on September 26, 2002 at 12:24:01 PT: seeking injunction to prevent DEA from raids "Gerald Uelmen, a law professor at Santa Clara University who is defending the Santa Cruz marijuana advocates, is putting together a civil complaint seeking an injunction to prevent the DEA from conducting further raids until the courts resolve the conflict between state and federal laws." Good news. Swift action should be taken by the courts before the DEA destroys (steals) any more medicine. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by eco-man on September 26, 2002 at 12:12:42 PT PHOTOS VIDEOS. Sacramento med MJ rally, 29 arrests PHOTOS, VIDEOS, articles. Sacramento medical cannabis rallies, 29 arrests, civil disobedience. Sept. 23 2002. Sacramento is the capital of California. State Capitol building rally, and Federal Courthouse rally and civil disobedience. http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/sacramento.htm and http://corporatism.tripod.com/sacramento.htm and http://members.fortunecity.com/multi19/sacramento.htm *News articles and press coverage of the American for Safe Access activities and the federal governments war on patients. http://www.safeaccessnow.org/newswire_detail.php?all=1 *ASA. Americans for Safe Access to medical cannabis. More ASA-related LINKS: http://www.angelfire.com/rnb/y/asa.htm *Emergency response list for medical marijuana rights' defense. ASA. Americans for Safe Access (to medical cannabis) email list and public archive. Only the moderators can send email to the list. You might try sending email to the moderator: hilary riseup.net http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/asa --List homepage, public archive, subscription links. http://lists.riseup.net/www/subscribe/asa --Easy online subsciption form. Just enter your email address. *Many more ASA-related messages, and medical cannabis messages are archived publicly at the link below. Hundreds, and possibly thousands, of non-subscribers read the open public archive of messages at this email list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cannabisaction --An MMM Million Marijuana March (and other topics) list homepage. 200 cities worldwide. cannabisaction-subscribe yahoogroups.com --Address to subscribe. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by druid on September 26, 2002 at 12:07:27 PT: Germany leaning towards legalization From: "Joe Wein" Cc: "VfD Infomaterial" Subject: Germany: Red-Green re-elected Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2002 13:06:00 +0900 On 22 September the ruling coalition of the left-of-centre Social Democrats (SPD) and their ecologist junior partner, the Greens, won a small but working majority of seats of the German Bundestag, the federal parliament, thereby virtually assuring chancellor Schroeder's re-election in October.During the last four years, the coalition had introduced harm reduction policies such as expanded methadone maintenance and safe injection rooms for addicts. This year saw the start of a controlled trial of diamorphine (heroin) to enable it's prescription by doctors. Before the 1998 election, the Greens had also campaigned for the legalisation of cannabis. In the coalition negotiations, Schroeder rejected that demand. The Greens got the position of Federal Drug Czar and drugs policy was moved from the Ministry of Interior to the Ministry of Health. The coalition agreement persisted: The Greens got other parts of their agenda acted on, such as gay civil union and a gradual phasing out of nuclear energy, but Cannabis reform remained locked out for that session of parliament.The 2002 election became a cliffhanger. While the SPD shed votes, dropping to 38.5%, the Greens polled 8.6%, their best result in more than two decades of existence. Under Germany's proportional representation system they take 55 out of 603 seats. Hans-Christian Stroebele, one of their direct seat candidates, even managed to pull ahead of his major party challengers and won a direct seat in a Berlin constituency. Three weeks before the elections, Stroebele had been one of the speakers at the annual Hanfparade in Berlin, the biggest cannabis event in the country.While the right-of-centre Christian Democrats (CDU-CSU), campaigning chiefly about high unemployment, managed to reclaim some of the votes lost in 1998, their result of 248 seats fell short of the 251 seats won by chancellor Schroeder's SPD. The smaller Liberals (FDP) won 7,4% of the vote, falling not only far short of their over-ambitious goal of 18%, but were also eclipsed by the newly energized Green Party. The reformed ex-communists of the Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS) slipped below the 5% threshhold, excluding them from proportional representation seats and left with only two successfull direct candidates to represent the Party in parliament.Both the Greens and the PDS are in favour of cannabis legalisation. SPD and FDP are against full scale legalisation, but are vaguely in support of some form of decriminalisation. Neither has done anything to change the status quo. Before winning the 1998 election, the SPD had clearly been in favour of reform.The CDU-CSU is hostile to any form of liberalisation. Before losing power it had criminalised sales and possession of drug strain cannabis seeds. Newly introduced "smoke a joint, lose your license" civil penalties got driving licenses revoked even in cases where there was no evidence of a person ever having driven under the influence of cannabis. In July this practice was finally declared unconstitional by the country's supreme court.The narrower majority of the red-green coalition should deter more controversial policies. On the other hand the balance of seats clearly shifted towards the Greens and they will demand more influence on key policies. Many of their earlier important projects have been realized during the last parliament. Cannabis reform remians a major unmet demand.Before the elections, a coalition of drug policy activist groups handed over some 4000 signatures to the Federal Drug Czar, supporting 4 basic demands: * Depenalisation of possession of up to 30g for personal use, * approval of medical use, * depenalisation of cultivation for personal use, * revocation of discriminative driving license regulations.A solution that meets all or some of these demands seems possible. In addition to pro-legalisation Greens and PDS, politicians of both SPD and FDP have suggested redefining possesion of small quantities for personal use as a civil infraction, which would enable police officers to turn a blind eye to it. This could reduce a huge case load of police and prosecutors that has produced little benefit. After cannabis case numbers have increased 8 years in a row, use is still at an all time high. Decreasing confiscation figures at thje borders suggest increased personal cultivation, despite the seed ban. In several large cities, even unofficial coffee shops operate. Prosecution rates vary widely between different parts of the country.Over the next few weeks SPD and Greens will negotiate the working agenda for a new coalition before electing a new government in October.Joe WeinVerein fuer Drogenpolitik e.V. Drug Policy Associationhttp://www.cannabislegal.de http://www.drogenpolitik.org the "courteous" behavior of john asscroft, george shrub's thug, in relation to m [ Post Comment ] Post Comment