-------------------------------------------------------------------

Methods, Safety Scrutinized After Shootout ('The Oregonian' Examines Tactics
Of Portland's Marijuana Task Force In Wake Of Officer's Death
During Warrantless Break-In - 'Knock-And-Talks' Result In Busts
Only Half The Time - Electric Company Acts As Member Of Task Force - In 1996,
Task Force Arrested 733 People, Confiscated $2.1 Million In Cash, Property,
Including 42 Houses, 14,425 Cannabis Plants Valued At Nearly $29 Million -
$2,000 Each)

Date: Thu, 05 Feb 1998 18:30:12 -0500
From: "R. Lake" 
Subject: MN: US OR: Methods, Safety Scrutinized after Shootout
To: DrugSense News Service 
Reply-to: rlake@utoledo.edu
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Roger Dodger
Source: The Sunday Orgonian
Section: Front Page
Author: J. Todd Foster of the Oregonian staff
Pubdate: 1 Feb 1998
Contact: letters@news.oregonian.com
Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/

METHODS, SAFETY SCRUTINIZED AFTER SHOOTOUT

The 'knock-and-talk' tactic for gaining entry to a suspect's house without a
warrant comes under renewed examination in light of last week's deadly
confrontation

Alane Loehr's grow light was perfect for nurturing her umbrella tree and
cactus in the dead of winter. The Northeast Portland plant lover never
expected her 1996 birthday present to lure marijuana detectives to her front
door.

Loehr was fair game under the Portland Police Bureau's "knock-and-talk'
method of confronting suspected pot growers when there's no probable cause
for a search warrant.

Prosecutors and police say innocent people such as Loehr are minor
casualties in the war on drugs. Knock-and-talks, they say, are the cheapest,
quickest and usually safest weapon in their arsenal. Residents don't have to
let police in, but most do and are accountable if any contraband is found.

In 1996, the last year for which statistics are available, the bureau's
marijuana task force arrested 733 people and confiscated cash and property,
including 42 houses, worth $2.1 million. They nabbed 14,425 pot plants worth
nearly $29 million.

Knock-and-talks can be triggered by confidential informants, calls from
angry neighbors, excessively high or low utility bills, or purchases of grow
lights.

The routine police tactic lost its innocence and obscurity Tuesday, however,
when Portland Officer Colleen Waibel and members of the bureau's marijuana
task force walked into an apparent ambush.

Waibel, 44, became the first Portland policewoman killed in the line of
duty. Two other officers were wounded. Police say they found marijuana in
the house where suspect Steven Douglas Dons, 37, lived. They also found a
large cache of dangerous weapons, including an SKS semiautomatic rifle that
allegedly was used to kill Waibel.

Her death has galvanized criminal defense attorneys and civil libertarians:
They want the bureau to end knock-and-talks. The technique leads officers to
drugs only half the time, according to court and bureau records, and is
nearly as likely to yield finds such as tomato plants, orchids and Loehr's
umbrella tree.

Critics also decry what they see as a financial incentive behind
knock-and-talks: Prosecutors generate city revenues by seizing the homes and
asses of convicted marijuana growers.

Sometimes, those homes belong to otherwise law-abiding, working hippies
caught in a time warp, said Philip Lewis, a Portland criminal defense
attorney. "It's like shooting fish in a barrel," he says. "Most of these
people are recreational growers who just want to get high."

But Assistant Police Chief Lynnae Berg, who heads the investigations branch,
defends the tactic. "We have found it to be a very valid and successful
technique, and we will continue to use it," Berg says.

As for forfeiture money being the driving force behind knock-and-talks, Berg
says: "I think that assertion is ludicrous. . . . The marijuana task force
is a unit recognized around the state for their professionalism. This is
really some of the cream of the crop of our officers, and I'm extremely
proud of them."

TACTIC ADAPTED TO CASES IN '80'S

Knock-and-talks are as old as crime and punishment.

The consent-search technique long has been used to gain access to vehicles
or to question murder suspects and witnesses. Consultant John Schlim, a
nationally known instructor of the method, says drug detectives adapted it
for use about 1985.

It has caught on nationwide and in Europe and Canada, says Schlim, a 30-year
police veteran in California who spent half his career enforcing narcotics
laws.

The concept is simple: If police suspect someone is dealing drugs, they
confront the suspect with a knock at the door and ask to search the
premises.

Schlim says nearly all residents, even those who have something to hide,
oblige. Waibel is only the second police officer to die as a result of a
knock-and-talk, he says; a Los Angeles officer died in 1996.

"You're making contact with dope dealers, for crying out loud," Schlim says.
"Sooner or later, bad things have to happen. It's just the law of averages."

Nothing suggests that the firefight Tuesday at 2612 S.E. 111th Ave, could
have been avoided. Dons refused to answer his door the first time drug
detectives knocked.

Then an officer reported the smell of marijuana plants and telephoned for a
search warrant. While police waited, Dons allegedly fed pot plants into his
wood stove.

Smelling their evidence and seeing it waft out the chimney, Waibel and four
other officers used a concrete stepping stone to bash down the front door.
They immediately were met by at least 10 shots. Dons was hit once in the
chest by return fire and remains in critical condition at OHSU Hospital.

John Bradley, the first assistant to Multnomah County District Attorney
Michael Schrunk, says knock-and-talks are the next best thing to search
warrants, which can be difficult to obtain.

"If you didn't have them, you'd have drug houses and little you could do
about it," Bradley says.

QUESTIONS ABOUT DETECTING SMELL

One of the criminal defense bar's chef complaints is that Portland police,
when they don't get the homeowner's consent to search, often get a warrant
by swearing to a judge they can smell marijuana plants.

Nashville chemist and smell expert Jim Woodford, a nationally recognized
court expert who has testified at several Portland drug trials, says police
sometimes can smell marijuana if the plants have bloomed.

But he once persuaded a federal judge in Portland to suppress marijuana
evidence by proving federal agents could not smell the plants upwind from
more than 300 feet. Woodford also is responsible for an Ohio case in which
that state has ruled smell alone is not probable cause for a warrant.

It's not that police are lying, he says, but a phenomenon known as Coueism,
named for Emile Coue, a psychologist who died in 1926. His theory is based
on the concept of selective perception: Narcotics officers smell marijuana
because their brains tell their noses to smell it, Woodford says.

"People think marijuana has a distinctive smell like bacon," he says, "It
has a very subtle plant odor."

Portland attorney David McDonald says knock-and-talks are a successful
police strategy but push civil rights to the brink.

"If I had a hound dog with this kind of a nose, then I'd be the most
successful raccoon hunter in the history of the Ozark bottomlands," McDonald
says.

The marijuana task force knocks on eight to 10 doors a week but on average
finds pot at only four or five, according to Portland Police Officer Kim
Keist, who testified to the figure during a July 29, 1996, deposition in an
asset forfeiture case.

Keist was wounded in Tuesday's shootout and is in fair condition at Legacy
Emanuel Hospital.

Defense lawyers particularly dislike a police tactic of staking out indoor
lighting and gardening stores -- a practice confirmed during a Nov. 13,
1995, deposition by task force Sgt. Jim Hudson, who was wounded in the hand
in Tuesday's raid.

Police also acknowledge in depositions and court cases that they receive
tips from Portland General Electric about customers who might be stealing
power to grow pot or those with wattage fluctuations. PGE spokeswoman Vickie
Rocker said the utility's diversion unit cooperates with police to curb
power theft.

Keith and Marlilee Tillstrom say task force members visited their Southeast
Portland home last month. The couple had suffered a power failure, and PGE
never relocked their meter after repairs. A meter reader might have
suspected the worst, speculates the couple, who complied with the police
search and, though innocent, felt violated.

"Is PGE an arm of the police department? I'm incensed," Marilee Tillstrom
says.

Oregon City lawyer John Henry Hingson III, former president of he National
Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys, says the Fourth Amendment
prohibits unwarranted searches and seizures.

"Unfortunately, those who toil in the vineyards of criminal defense would
say that the Fourth Amendment has shrunk to the third and a half," he says.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Methods, Safety Scrutinized After Shootout - Taking Precautions
(Different Version Of 'Oregonian' Article On Shooting Death
During Portland Marijuana Task Force Warrantless Break-In)

(Different from previous article)

The Oregonian
oregonlive.com
February 1, 1998
letters@news.oregonian.com

Officers and experts say the recent series of
traumatic events will give police a heightened
sense of vulnerability and a greater drive to take
precautions

By Dan Hortsch
of The Oregonian staff

Most people don't start the day wondering how
many others in their line of work died yesterday.
Or last month. Or last year.

Most people aren't police officers.

"When these men and
women go to work every
day, they put on bulletproof
vests and guns and other
equipment," said Dave
Simpson, a former Portland
Police Bureau homicide detective. "Most of us go
to work and worry about the color of our shirt."

The difference is significant. Police officers
stepping outside each day might wonder whether
this is the day they will face someone who wants
to kill them and tries to act on that impulse and
hatred.

The shooting deaths of two Portland officers in
the past six months and shooting attacks on other
officers in the past two weeks make starting each
shift a potentially tense moment for survivors and
their colleagues. Not just for Portland officers but
also for officers throughout the region.

That tension, current and former officers say,
probably will translate into a heightened,
protective awareness of potential problems, even
in seemingly routine situations. Officers might
take precautions they might not have previously.

Beyond that, police will rely on continuing
discussion, updated training and standard
procedures designed to keep them safe.

"There is a natural tendency in that kind of
business to not always recognize how vulnerable
you can be," said Simpson, a 29-year veteran of
the bureau who retired five years ago and went
into private security. "It is human nature. You do
it so much, it is hard to stay on the edge all the
time."

Recent events involving Portland and other
officers have provided a stark reminder of the
need to keep that edge. The public, some say, can
help ease tension by understanding an officer's
role and cooperating even when they know the
situation is innocent.

The immediate shock and sense of loss is from
the death of Portland Officer Colleen Waibel, 44,
who was gunned down Tuesday during a drug
raid. Two other officers were wounded, one
seriously.

In July, Portland Officer Thomas L. Jeffries, 35,
was shot and killed as he searched for a suspected
gunman in a darkened back yard.

Two weeks ago, a Portland sergeant making a
traffic stop was shot but saved by his protective
vest. And about 12 hours after Waibel died, a
man fired at Portland police, who returned fire,
killing the man. A day later, state and local
officers in Umatilla County in Eastern Oregon
shot and killed a man who had been firing at them
with the same kind of weapon used to kill Waibel.

159 officers killed in 1997

To put the matter in national perspective, 159
federal, state and local law enforcement officers
were killed in the line of duty in 1997. That was
an increase from 116 fatalities in 1996, the lowest
since 1959, according to the National Law
Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund, based in
Washington, D.C. The average this decade has
been 151 deaths each year.

Of 1997's total, 70 were shot to death, and five
died of knife wounds. Six died in falls, and most
of the rest died in vehicle accidents or were struck
by vehicles.

The increase in violent deaths of police officers
contrasted with a drop in violent crime in general.
According to the FBI, violent crime decreased 5
percent in the first half of the year, the most
current figures available.

For the most part, said Lt. Gregg Hastings,
spokesman for the Oregon State Police, news of
police officer deaths translates into a heightened
awareness in even apparently routine encounters.

"You just pay closer attention to what is going on
inside the vehicle and any movements made by
individuals," he said. "When you approach, you
make sure you can safely do so by checking the
interior. You keep an eye on the occupants and
pay attention to how they respond to your
requests."

Wayne Inman, a former assistant Portland police
chief who left in 1992 after 28 years with the
force, said police after such shootings might react
sooner to protect themselves and others.

"In some cases they might pull weapons now
when they might not have before in a situation
that doesn't look right," said Inman, coordinator
of search and rescue for the Deschutes County
Sheriff's Office. He previously served as police
chief in Billings, Mont. 'Seconds could make
difference'

"That few seconds could make a difference
between surviving and not surviving."

Hastings agreed. In possibly serious cases, he
said, added precautions "might include pulling a
weapon for safety. They may not point it, but
they will have it ready."

Other procedures, Hastings said, might include
"communicating with people without approaching
the vehicle, and asking them to step out."

However, Dr. Ronald Turco -- a psychiatrist, a
former homicide detective and a current reserve
member of the Beaverton Police Department --
said his experience is that officers who have been
in traumatic situations do not turn to pulling a gun
unnecessarily.

"They don't want to risk an encounter," he said.
"They follow procedures" even though they are
operating from "an enhanced hyper-vigilance."

The public needs to understand police procedures
and manner, several police professionals said.
Methods that might seem harsh or overly firm are
for everyone's protection.

"When officers take control of a situation with
voice or by confronting someone, it is because
they want to reduce or eliminate the potential for
violence," Inman said. "It amazes me when
people complain when officers do their job and
take control. The public needs to understand that
there are people out there who are dangerous.
Most don't wear signs around their neck saying, 'I
am dangerous.'"

Driver can help

Hastings said the average driver who has been
stopped can help by staying in the car, keeping
hands visible -- preferably on the steering wheel --
and not moving quickly. Tell an officer up front,
he said, about a concealed weapons permit or
other potential safety matters.

Ramifications of shootings also can result from
media attention and public doubt, said Lt. Jim
Tibbs, spokesman for the Boise Police
Department.

Boise police have had a rough two years, with the
shooting death of an officer in September -- the
first such death in Boise -- and a half-dozen
others injured in shootings and other incidents.
Boise police in that time also killed seven
civilians. If the public and media are critical or
don't understand the facts, Tibbs said, police feel
pressure.

The result, he said, could be that an officer, on
the chance that the encounter might lead to
violence, is tempted to not bother stopping a car
for apparently minor reasons, such as an
out-of-date registration or a broken taillight.

"We as a department don't want that mindset to
develop," Tibbs said.

When Boise police are involved in a critical
incident, he said: "We look to see if policies need
to be modified in any way, if there are different
ways officers can approach cars. ... They don't
know who the person is they are walking up
upon. It can be an extremely dangerous individual
who has decided to have a shootout, or it can be
the mayor."

Training and discussion of each incident, he said,
"can put off an awkward situation."

Dianne Middle, who recently was appointed
director of the Board on Public Safety Standards
and Training in Monmouth, commonly called the
state police academy, said the academy regularly
revises training to reflect altered demands on
officers and the nature of events they will
encounter.

Learning from situations

"We look at situations and try to learn from all of
them," said Middle, a former police officer,
deputy district attorney, assistant attorney general
and chairwoman of the Oregon Board of Parole.
"Any situation has these potentials (for danger),
and we teach them to analyze the risk of any
given situation, how to keep it safe, who else is
looking out for you, the kinds of things that can
trigger things to go wrong."

Through all the practical but potentially lifesaving
matters, police officers will mourn for lost
comrades.

The Portland bureau has a Traumatic Incident
Committee made up of teams of officers who
have been involved in deadly force situations and
of spouses of such officers. This past week, said
Officer Dave Thoman, a trauma team leader who
had worked with Jeffries and spoke at his funeral,
all teams were brought in to work with any officer
affected by the shootings.

Mayor Vera Katz, who visited all the precincts
after Waibel was killed, said she has noticed a
difference in how the bureau grieves.

In the past, she said, officers speaking with a
counselor did so with a sense of detached duty.
"They'd avert their eyes as if to say, 'I don't need
this. I'm not really even listening to this,'" she
said.

"But it wasn't like that. They listened. They need
it. Their families need it."

The public can add to that support, Inman said.
Saying that officers want to make a difference,
want to help their communities, he added: "I
would hope that our community could wrap their
collective arms around the police bureaus and
officers. ... We are all in this together."

Staff writer Michele Parente contributed to this
report.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Oregon Police Rights Invasion ('Associated Press' Article On Cops
In McMinnville, Oregon, Strip-Searching As Many As 30 Teenage Girls,
Plus Commentary From Sender Comparing Incident To Warrantless Raid
In Portland By Marijuana Task Force)

To: cannabis-commonlaw-l@teleport.com
Subject: CnbsCL - OR police rights invasion
From: terry.s@juno.com (Terry Smith)
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 1998 11:19:45 EST
Sender: owner-cannabis-commonlaw-l@teleport.com

Perhaps some here will see some similarity between this situation and the
recent one where a cop was killed in the process of perpetrating an
apparent war on drugs felony breaking and entering plus attempted murder
in Oregon.

The comments at the bottom suggest why it is sometimes necessary to
initiate action through Federal prosecution outside the local
jurisdiction.

Recent court actions do not do well supporting student rights to not be
invaded as this incident caused, though also do not support such searches
for non-felony crimes with no probable cause against a specific suspect.
It could be argued that the cops involved threatened a physically violent
felony, and students would have been justified using due defensive force
including deadly, any history of minors being stripped of 2nd Am rights
aside.

Terry

Area Pr_Net, Msg#900, Feb-01-98 02:06PM
From: Chris Meissen
Subject: Re: Gotta love this country

Imagine what they'll do if they ever get all the guns.

>From TPG-

***

McMINNVILLE, Ore. (AP) - Told by a policewoman to strip off her panties
or have it done for her, 13-year-old Kayla Plumeau had one thought: "I wanted
to call my mom.''

No way, she was told. No one in her Duniway Middle School gym class could
call home or leave until the two women officers searched them to makes sure
stolen CDs, makeup and money hadn't been hidden in their bras and underpants.

Kayla said she had little choice but to take off her pants and shirt.

"I was told if I didn't take them off, they would do a full body
search,'' she said.

"If I didn't pull them off, they said they'd do it for me.''

The officers found nothing stolen, but Thursday's episode has indignant
parents threatening to go to court over what they contend was an improper
strip search of as many as 30 teen-age girls.

"They take it for granted that just because they are kids, they don't have
rights,'' said Connie Brown, a parent who is organizing a picket against
the school Monday.

Police Chief Rod Brown has hand-delivered apologies to the parents of the
seventh and eighth-graders, writing that the conduct of the officers during the
two-hour search was beyond ``what was necessary.''

"We believe the manner in which the search was conducted may have been
inappropriate,'' Brown wrote. "Officials taking the action were acting in
best
interest of kids involved as well as school as a whole, but their
judgment may have been rash.''

Brown insisted the students were asked only to loosen their clothing and lower
their pants to their hips.

Several girls told a much different story.

"It was a strip search,'' said Sarah Gadberry, 14. ``I had to take off my
pants and shirt.''

The girls said the search took place during gym class after several students
in the locker room complained that jewelry, makeup, CD's and about $30
had been stolen. The gym teacher asked the guilty party to come forward.

When no one spoke up, the school called the police.

The girls were called into the locker room two at a time. Some were asked to
lift their shirts, some had to shake their bras and others were asked to
lower their pants and panties to their ankles. Several girls who were
menstruating refused to drop their panties and were told if they didn't
they would be subject to a full cavity search.

Officers found some of the stolen items Friday afternoon on the floor of a
girls' bathroom.

Parents contend anyone had access to the lockers.

The issue has angered many parents in this city of 18,000, about 40 miles
southwest of Portland.

"This is not going to stop here,'' said Barbara Paulson, who kept her
12-year-old daughter, Amanda, home from school Friday and plans to file
complaints against police, the school, the gym teacher and the principal.

Superintendent Elaine Taylor said the McMinnville School District was
conducting its own investigation. ``We are extremely sorry about the
entire search incident,'' she said.

***

> What needs to be said is that the whole instance was illegal! And that
> illegalities will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

And who will do the prosecuting and who will hear the case in this town of
50,000? The prosecuting attorney whose career depends upon the testimony
and cooperation of the members of the police department? The judge who
routinely hears misdemeanor cases which depend upon acceptance of these
officer's testimony in order to find in favor of the State? I'd be willing to bet that
a town of 50,000 has only a couple dozen attorneys and they all belong to the
same country club, entertain the same hopes of someday being appointed to
judgeships of their own, and know that if they challenge the cozy relationships
between the police and the courts they may as well move to another town or
start new careers because they'll never win another case in that town.

-- Chris Meissen

***

"False is the idea of utility that would take fire from men
because it burns, and water because one may drown in it;
that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws
that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature.
They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor
determined to commit crimes." -- Cesare Beccaria

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Girl Treated For Alcohol Overdose ('The Daily Olympian' Notes An 11-Year-Old Girl
Has Mixed Vodka And Whiskey In Olympia, Washington)

From: "W.H.E.N." (when@olywa.net)
To: "Hemp Talk" (hemp-talk@hemp.net)
Subject: HT: ART: 11- yr. old Oly girl treated for alcohol overdose
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 1998 22:21:00 -0800
Sender: owner-hemp-talk@hemp.net

At least she wasn't doing drugs- Bob Owen

***

Daily Olympian (Olympia, Washington)
2/1/98
OLYMPIA

Girl treated for alcohol overdose

An 11-year old Olympia girl was treated for an alcohol overdose at the
downtown Olympia Center.

The community center staff told police the girl was drunk when the center
on Columbia Street opened its doors at 9 p.m.

She was immediately taken by staff to the rest room. Police and medics
were called. The girl had vomited several times throughout the night, the
police report said.

She told police she drank vodka and whiskey but couldn't remember who she
had been drinking with or who gave her the alcohol, the report said.

The girl was treated at the scene and released, the report said. Her
13-yearold sister will be questioned in connection with the case, the
report said.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Freedom Fighters Of The Month ('High Times' Writes Up Cheryl And Jim Miller
And Their Struggle For Medical Marijuana For Cheryl's Multiple Sclerosis -
Trenton, New Jersey Demonstration One Of Many During Boston-to-Washington
Wheelchair Crusade)

Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 18:50:21 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: US NJ: Cheryl And Jim Miller: MJ vs. MS in NJ
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Richard Lake rlake@mapinc.org
Source: High Times
Author: Jessica Loos
Pubdate: February, 1998, No. 270
Contact: letters@hightimes.com
Website: http://www.hightimes.com/

FREEDOM FIGHTERS OF THE MONTH

CHERYL AND JIM MILLER: MJ VS. MS IN NJ

Trenton, NJ - Cheryl Miller rolled her hospital bed to the steps of the New
Jersey state capitol here last October, and, as two state troopers
approached, drank down a marijuana tincture mixed with orange Gatorade. She
was demonstrating marijuana's effectiveness in quelling the chronic muscle
spasticity associates with multiple sclerosis, a disease she was diagnosed
with 27 years ago.

"I am in possession of an illegal marijuana product," her husband, Jim,
explained to the cops. "I tot it and supplied it to my wife and she took
it. I think you should take it and have it tested and identified, so that
it can go on official record what exactly it is here that worked."

The Millers' visit to Governor Christie Whitman, who says publicly that she
does not support medical marijuana, was one of many stops on the
Boston-to-Washington Wheelchair Crusade, a 450-mile "peace walk and roll"
for medical marijuana and ibogaine organized by Cures Not Wars.

The state troopers apparently didn't like the position the Millers put them
in, but it seems they were under orders not to arrest them, and wouldn't
take the remnants of the tincture of cannabis. As Jim put it, "Cheryl's
always in jail, what are they gonna do? Put her in a different bed in a
cell instead of at home or in the hospital?"

Jim, a self-employed carpenter, sold all his tools so that they could pay
for hotel rooms and participate in the Journey. "I can get my tools back,
but this may happen only once," he told HT.

Prior to the crusade, Cheryl hadn't been out overnight in over 10 years.
"I've been having a good time getting to talk to people and getting a
message across that desperately needs to be heard. If I can do that I
will," she explains. "I am motivated by the hope that everyone with my
condition has the legal opportunity to try marijuana. I needed to do this
to help other people, and I felt that I could help. It was the most
important thing I've ever done, except for having and raising my four kids,
whom I've always wanted to set a good example for."

The Boston-to-Washington trek was not the Millers' first medical-marijuana
march. In 1993, Jim pushed Cheryl's wheelchair with a life-sized photo of
her in it 58 miles from their home in Seaside to Trenton.

"We had all this info," he says, but the press isn't interested in facts,
they're interested in stunts, so I decided to walk across the state on a
main road, where lots of people would see me. If the press wouldn't tell
anyone, I would. If they wouldn't put medical marijuana in the paper, I
would tell people myself."

Cheryl, 51, who has never been a recreational pot smoker, still doesn't
inhale because it hurts her throat, causing slight swelling. She has
difficulty coughing and blowing her nose, so smoking would exacerbate
aspects of her condition. But after a friend of Jim's suggested eating
marijuana, she experimented with marinated-pot salad dressing and then
brownies. Both worked miraculously well.

She started taking Marinol in 1993, at an annual cost of $20,000 to the
state. Her average daily dosage is eight five-milligram tablets. The
Marinol helped wean her off Tranxene, a sedative-hypnotic tranquilizer. She
has also discontinued weekly steroid shots. Both have deleterious
side-effect like congestive heart failure and faulty liver function.

But the herb tincture, prepared in Humbolt County, CA, and passed to her
thru the New York City Cannabis Buyers' Club, has the fastest, most extreme
results. After drinking it, says Jim, "She started moving her right arm for
the first time in five years." Her average daily tincture dose is six to 10
drops a day, only because she is trying to conserve supplies. "Twenty drops
works even better," explains Jim, but "we don't want to run out, it is
expensive and comes from far away.

"The thing about all this that gets me the most is that multiple sclerosis
is Jack Kevorkian's single biggest client," he declares. The irony is that
if he knew about pot, he wouldn't be able to help people get it legally to
feel better, but he can help them die. And I have a better respect for life
from knowing Cheryl. She never complains like I do or says anything bad
about anyone, even people she should.

"That's kind of always been my job," he laughs.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Pending Medical Marijuana Legislation (Letter To Editor Of 'Baltimore Sun'
Gives Update On $1 Million Marijuana Study By Institute Of Medicine
Commissioned By Drug Czar, Urges Support For US Representative Barney Frank's
Federal Medical Marijuana Bill, HR 1782)

Subj: PUBLISHED in Baltimore Sunday Sun, February 1, 1998
From: "Kevin Fansler" (kfansler@erols.com)
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 1998 10:40:04 -0500

Letter appeared in the Baltimore Sunday Sun, February 1, 1998

Pending medical marijuana legislation.

The Institute of Medicine (IOM) began its medicinal marijuana hearings
on December 14-16 in Irvine, California. The IOM is gathering
information for the $1 million report commissioned by the Clinton
administration's drug czar. No new research into marijuana's medical
uses is being conducted, however -- the report will simply compile
existing data.

This $1 million "book report" is part of the federal government's
plan to convince the public that the medicinal marijuana issue should be
handled by scientists, not voters or legislators.

Too late: In 1970, Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act
which declared that marijuana has "no currently accepted medical use."
That was politics. Patients should not be forced to suffer or live in
fear of arrest for decades until scientists rectify a problem that
Congress created.

Right now, even if a state allows patients to use marijuana,
patients still face federal penalties -- up to one year in prison for
simple possession. Furthermore, federal law prohibits states from
allowing pharmacies to distribute marijuana under any circumstances.

Fortunately, there is a bill pending in Congress (H.R. 1782) that
would allow states to create their own medicinal marijuana policies. If
a state wanted to allow patients to use medicinal marijuana, the federal
government would not interfere with the system that the state chose to
implement.

There is an easy way to help patients suffering from cancer,
glaucoma, AIDS, and multiple sclerosis: Write to your U.S.
representative and ask him or her to support H.R. 1782.

Sincerely,

Kevin S. Fansler
4044 Wilkinson Road
Havre de Grace, MD 21078
Phone: 410-879-5466

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Health - The Straight Dope - Is Marijuana An Evil Weed, Or An Untapped Weapon
In Our Medical Arsenal? (A Positive Special Report On Medical Marijuana
In The February Issue Of The Fitness Magazine, 'Shape')

Date: Mon, 26 Jan 1998 20:05:59 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service (mapnews@mapinc.org)
From: Richard Lake (rlake@mapinc.org)
Subject: MN: Is Marijuana An Evil Weed, Or An Untapped Weapon In Our
Medical Arsenal?
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Kathy Galbraith and Carl E. Olsen
Source: Shape Magazine
Author: Sharen Cohen
Pubdate: February 1998
Website: http://www.fitnessonline.com/magazines/shape/

Health - The Straight Dope

SPECIAL REPORT: IS MARIJUANA AN EVIL WEED, OR AN UNTAPPED WEAPON IN OUR
MEDICAL ARSENAL?

Sue, a 35-year-old former counselor for retarded adults, smoked marijuana
every day for a year. It was the only thing that relieved the debilitating
nausea she suffered after a blood vessel ruptured in her brain. When the
medications her doctor had prescribed proved only minimally effective, she
tried dronabinol, a prescription synthetic form of THC, the primary active
ingredient in marijuana.

But Sue still couldn't keep anything down, including the dronabinol. "I
was nauseated or vomiting every moment of every day and literally wasting
away, she recalls. Then she learned that for conditions like hers, smoking
marijuana has several advantages over dronabinol: It's cheaper, doesn't
have to be swallowed and digested, it acts faster with fewer side effects,
and because it can be smoked one puff at a time, its easier to control the
dose. So she tried it.

"Taking just a few puffs relieved my nausea enough that I could eat," she
says. She no longer smokes marijuana but credits it with saving her life
and sanity. Yet she's angry that she had to break the law. "People treat
this thing that helped me so much like such an evil," she says. "They'd put
me in jail for it."

Pot Politics

Since 1978, 36 states have passed legislation recognizing marijuana's
therapeutic value in a variety of ailments. But for 60 years, the federal
government has prohibited its use in any form, even though not a single
death has been linked to marijuana's medical use.

Politics distinguish marijuana from other potential pharmaceuticals,
preventing it from undergoing the scientific testing that any new drug must
undergo. Scientists can legally get marijuana only from one federally
regulated farm, and research requests often have been denied. Meanwhile,
thousands of sick people must get or grow the plant illegally, risking
prosecution and exposure to product impurities.

Because research has been so stymied, the spectrum of expert opinions on
marijuana's future in medicine ranges widely. "We have 5,000 years of
recorded experience to show us it's not toxic," says Lester Grinspoon,
M.D., associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and
co-author of Marihuana, the Forbidden Medicine (Yale University Press,
1997). "In fact, the U.S. government has spent millions of do1lars trying
to prove toxicity but has come up with nothing."

Is Reefer Madness?

Cannabis (marijuana's Latin name) was widely prescribed in the United
States for pain relief until it was made illegal in 1937. In 1970, despite
copious anecdotal evidence of its effectiveness and safety, the Drug
Enforcement Administration designated it a "Schedule I" drug, meaning that
like heroin, it's considered unsafe, with no recognized therapeutic value
and a high potential for abuse. (Reclassifying it as a Schedule 2 drug
would let doctors prescribe it.) In 1976, the U.S, Food and Drug
Administration began a compassionate Investigational New Drug program
allowing government-sanctioned marijuana use in certain medical cases. In
the late '70s and early '80s, more than 35 states passed legislation
establishing marijuana research programs. Most were rendered defunct by
Federal regulations.

The IND program was suspended in 1991 because the flood of applicants
resulting from AIDS was seen as an obstacle to the Bush administration's
war on drugs. Today, only eight people use marijuana legally in this
country because of a grandfather clause. But years of anecdotal evidence
and at least 65 human studies established medicinal marijuana use as
legitimate for these conditions:

Cancer

The best-substantiated use is to relieve chemotherapy-induced nausea,
vomiting and appetite loss. A 1991 Harvard Medical School survey of 1,035
oncologists found that 54 percent favored making marijuana a prescription
drug; 44 percent said they'd broken the law by suggesting that patients get
it illegally. AIDS

Marijuana's ability to combat "wasting syndrome" by increasing appetite has
been well-documented.

Glaucoma

By reducing pressure in the eye caused by fluid buildup, inhaled marijuana
can slow or halt this sight-robbing disease. Many ophthalmologists counter
that marijuana can accelerate vision loss by reducing blood flow to the
optic nerve, and that new glaucoma drugs make it unnecessary.

Multiple Sclerosis, Spinal Cord Injury

Marijuana may relieve muscle pain and spasms, tremors and urinary
incontinence.

Epilepsy, Related Disorders

Might help prevent seizures in up to 30 percent of patients not helped by
standard drugs.

Pain

Marijuana may be helpful for migraine headaches; inflammatory and
autoimmune diseases such as arthritis, scleroderma and lupus; colitis;
Crohn's disease; and menstrual cramps and premenstrual syndrome. This use
is well worth investigating: In 1996, more than 7,000 Americans died of
gastric bleeding from taking aspirin or other non-steroidal
anti-inflammatory drugs such as ibuprofen.

The debate will only be resolved when large numbers of people are allowed
to use marijuana under medical supervision. As Harvard's Grinspoon says:
"Doctors, not the federal government and the DEA, need to be in charge of
this. And we need to get over our misconceptions about it. Many patients
who use marijuana don't even really like it. It's just the only thing that
works for them.

THE POT SMOKED AND THE DAMAGE DONE

"To withhold marijuana for medical use because some people abuse it would
be like withholding Valium or morphine for the same reason, says Mary Lynn
Mathre, M.S.N., R.N., C.A.R.N., addictions consultant at the University of
Virginia Health System in Charlotesville and editor of Cannabis in Medical
Practice; A Legal, Historical and Pharmacological Overview of the
Therapeutic Use of Marijuana (McFarland & Co., 1997).

Marijuana has drawbacks, especially when used as a recreational drug, but
they generally don't apply to medical use. To sum up the evidence:

Lung Damage

Heavy marijuana smoking can be hazardous to the lungs, but medicinal users
generally don't smoke enough for it to be a serious risk. Marijuana also
can be ingested in foods or teas, but the results take longer to be felt
and last longer and the dose may be harder to control.

Mental Impairment

Because it can cause short-term impairment of judgment, concentration,
recall and coordination, people are advised not to use marijuana before
driving or performing other complex tasks.

Dependence

"Problems with psychological dependence, accidents and lack of motivation
may occur among heavy recreational users, but most medical users taper off
or stop when the symptoms are relieved," Mathre says. No valid evidence
shows that using marijuana recreationally or medically leads to the use of
"harder" drugs. As for the argument that legalizing marijuana for medical
use will open the door to full-scale legalization, that hasn't proved true
of morphine and other opiates.

Antisocial Behavior

No human studies have shown that marijuana use leads to increased aggression.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

The Case For Medical Marijuana (The February Issue
Of 'The Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal' Describes The Recent History
Of The Campaign For Medical Marijuana In Canada)

Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 11:27:55 -0700
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Canada: The Case for Medical Marijuana
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: chris@thecompassionclub.org
Pubdate: Feb 1998
Source: Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal
Author: Steve McLaren, Staff Writer

THE CASE FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA

"Basically, what I do is, I cause trouble. That's my function. If you
cause enough trouble eventually you effect change."

Meet Alan Young. Last summer the Osgoode Hall law professor launched a
constitutional challenge against marijuana laws on behalf of Chris
Clay, owner of a London, Ont., store called Hemp Nation. Clay, whose
merchandise included marijuana plants, was charged with trafficking
and cultivating a narcotic. While Young's client was found guilty,
Ontario Court Justice John McCart was tolerant, handing Clay a
relatively modest $750 fine and three years probation. In his
judgement, McCart said, "as it is commonly used, occasionally,
cannabis presents only minor.or subtle risks to the health of the
individual." This spring Young will represent Lynn Harichy, a multiple
sclerosis patient charged with possession after lighting a marijuana
joint in front of a London police station.

Young expects many new clients now that "buyers' clubs," supplying
marijuana to anyone with a doctor's recommendation, are opening in
Toronto, Oakville, Kitchener, Guelph, London and Peterborough. While
stressing he's not the organizer of these groups, he is willing to
defend them.

Young notes that, if his potential clients are charged, it would be
for trafficking, an indictable offence tried by a jury. "Dr. Henry
Morgentaler was providing abortions," he says. "Abortions were against
the law. He was tried seven times. He was never convicted." Calling
Morgentaler's rationale the Common Law Defence of Necessity, and
assuming all marijuana sales will be for medicinal purposes, Young
theorizes, "I suspect if I put enough AIDS and cancer patients into
the box, there aren't going to be a whole lot of juries that are going
to want to put these kids in jail."

Alan Young isn't alone in his campaign to make the decriminalization
of marijuana a health issue. In December, Ontario Justice Patrick
Sheppard stayed charges of cultivation and possession against Terry
Parker, a Toronto man who argued he needs the drug to combat his
epilepsy. Concluding Parker's rights were violated, Sheppard ordered
the police to return some of Parker's confiscated marijuana plants.
Sheppard wrote, "Deprivation to (Mr. Parker) arising from a blanket
prohibition denying him possession of marijuana, in the circumstance
of this case, does little or nothing to enhance the state's interest
in better health for this individual member of the community."

The Parker case was specifically referred to in January when a
Kitchener man received a light sentence for possession, partly because
of his diagnosed "chronic cumulative trauma disorder" and because the
Parker decision left the law in "a state of flux", according to the
judge.

Some advocates of medical marijuana are taking their case straight to
the government. Don Kilby, director of health services at the
University of Ottawa, is applying to Health Canada's Special Access
Program for permission to "prescribe" marijuana to Jean Charles
Pariseau, an AIDS patient who gained 20 pounds after smoking marijuana
as a last resort. Even in the law-and-order-conscious Reform party, MP
Jim Hart submitted a private member's motion proposing marijuana be
decriminalized "for health purposes, explicitly for the purpose of
providing pain relief for the terminally ill." All of these efforts
are playing out in the backdrop of an Angus Reid poll finding 83 per
cent of those surveyed support the legalization of marijuana for
medical purposes.

Marijuana advocates, and even those opposed, tend to agree on one
point: pharmacies should have a role in the medical marijuana issue.
"We have a perfectly good delivery system now through pharmacies;
they keep good records, they relate what people are taking to the
other things that they're doing and I should think that they would
still fulfil a role in these cases as well," says Barry Beyerstein of
the Brain Behaviour Laboratory of Simon Fraser University's department
of psychology, a member of the pro-decriminalization Canadian
Foundation for Drug Policy. "Pharmacists are already the custodians of
society of useful substances which also have some danger," concurs
Robin Room, chief scientist for the Addiction Research Foundation. "It
would be entirely appropriate for pharmacists to be saying, `Look, if
you're going to have medical marijuana, then it makes sense for us to
be the places that you get it.'"

While Room may deem their participation appropriate, pharmacy has been
quiet on the health politics of marijuana. Both the Canadian
Pharmacists Association and the Canadian Society of Hospital
Pharmacists have no position on the issue. "There's a lot that needs
to happen, or at least processes that need to happen, before the
pharmacist can even come into play, and that is a defined source, a
controlled source that meets regulatory requirements," says Bill
Leslie, executive director of the Canadian Society of Hospital
Pharmacists. Noelle-Dominique Willems, CPhA's director of government
and pub lic affairs, agrees, adding that like euthanasia it's an issue
that divides the profession. Says Willems, "If there's...a
Parliamentary committee that looks into it, which may happen if
practice becomes more frequent, then we would definitely, at that
point, at least prepare a position to talk about the role of
pharmacists, as we did with euthanasia."

Others suggest a number of reasons why the profession hasn't spoken out.
Harold Kalant, professor emeritus of pharmacology at the University of
Toronto's faculty of medicine, says, "It would create headaches, because
they would have to keep extra records in the same way they do for narcotics
or for other controlled drugs. Secondly, it would increase the risk for
them of breakins to try to steal their stock. Thirdly, it may be that they
just don't want to get mixed up in a messy situation." Wayne Hindmarsh,
dean of the faculty of pharmacy at the University of Manitoba, and author
of a guide for parents called Drugs: What Your Kid Should Know, says that
security could be an issue. "You're going to bring in a different
clientele," he says. "You know, it's not just going to be marijuana.
There's going to be other types of drug users as well."

However, two of the lawyers involved think the profession is reticent
for other reasons. "I think pharmacists are pawns in all this," says
Young. "They're a conduit for the facilitation of medical and
governmental policy, and they don't necessarily lead it." Aaron
Harnett, legal counsel for Terry Parker, says there's simply no money
in it for pharmacists. "Marijuana costs seven dollars an ounce to
grow. It sells for $350 now, so Terry now can grow it for free (or
for seven dollars an ounce) and he can cut out the middle man, the
end man, everyone."

But even Young and Harnett agree that pharmacists should be involved
if the marijuana is for medically-approved reasons. Says Harnett, "The
60-year-old lady with glaucoma, she's not going to want to start
growing pot plants, but if her doctor says, `Give it a try. It may
save your eyesight,' she may want a legal source, where she can be
assured of its quality, and not have to get her hands dirty."

Sorting out the distribution issue is proving difficult. While Kilby
is optimistic federal regulators will approve his Special Access
Program request for medicinal marijuana, Ottawa lawyer Eugene
Oscapella, part of a lobby group supporting Kilby's efforts, is more
sceptical after Health Canada denied their first request. The health
department concluded that neither Kilby nor the listed "manufacturer,"
the patient's current supplier, had the proper licences under the
Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. "It's hard to tell what messages
we're getting from them, quite frankly," he says. "In one sense,
they're scrambling to find a way out of this mess. In another, we've
got a guy who's dying of AIDS and who's being forced to go to the
illegal market to get a drug that's saving his life."

But Dann Michols, director general of Health Canada's Therapeutic
Products Program, says many controlled substances have been approved
by the government, such as heroin and morphine, and "it isn't really
earth-shattering to think that perhaps marijuana as a substance might
have medicinal use." While Oscapella and others argue no manufacturer
will ever agree to cooperate in a marijuana application, Michols calls
that "supposition," arguing it could be supplied by a university, a
distributor, or even a grower.

"There are other substances that are controlled substances where
suppliers have obtained the necessary licences to obtain, process and
distribute the product, so it's not an insurmountable barrier if
someone wants to do it," he says. He adds that, if Kilby went outside
the country to obtain a supplier, the government itself might end up
distributing the product. "Probably we would have to set up a
mechanism whereby the supplier supplied us and we provided the
material to the physician here, but that too is doable," he says. "The
government of the importing country would have to be involved to
ensure control of distribution."

While Kilby works his way through the Special Access Program, he longs
for the day when patients would simply visit a pharmacy. "I'm sitting
in my office now in front of about 150 binders on drugs that are
accessed through (the Special Access Program), because you have to
keep records for these patients, you have to provide records back to
the pharmaceutical company, you have to inform the government. There's
a lot of red tape to go through."

Many of the smokers battling the court system would also like to see
doctors and pharmacists helping them get their supply. While Lynn
Harichy would like to cultivate it herself, "If you could get it at
pharmacies that would be great because it is a hassle in the winter to
grow it," she says. "They let us take all these other medicines,
you know, trial drugs, and the side effects are so bad. If I don't
smoke (pot), I'm going to be in pain and I just, I can't take that."

Terry Parker, whose landmark victory is being appealed by the Crown,
says simply, "it's just been a real nightmare trying to get this
substance recognized for preventing epilepsy." Parker says because of
his illness he's become addicted to prescription drugs, and candidly
describes his treatment and its effects. "My skin is white as a ghost,
my teeth are grinding, my left leg and my left arm are all over the
place, my body is just convulsing. A couple of joints, smoke that,
within two to three minutes I've got instant relief... That's the
beauty about marijuana, the absolute beauty, and no pharmacist should
be shy about the subject." While Parker's case is under appeal, his
lawyer says other Crown Attorneys are withdrawing similar charges as a
result of the decision.

The Parker case, however, may have confused things even further,
according to Kalant, who was a Crown witness in the trial. "The judge
was acting essentially on compassionate grounds rather than on
scientific grounds," he says. "I think the judge was perhaps acting
more as a humane person than as an objective arbiter of the law. There
are probably valid medical uses for cannabinoids, but smoking pot is
rarely the way to do it."

That is the crux of the marijuana debate: does it have medical value
Advocates argue it's been used safely for thousands of years, and
point out there is no accepted lethal dose. Supporters of California's
Proposition 215, a referendum that decriminalized the use of marijuana
for certain medical treatments, argued the benefits of the substance
in treating cancer, anorexia, AIDS, chronic pain, spasticity,
glaucoma, arthritis, and migraine. They said a Harvard University
survey concluded one-half of oncologists would prescribe marijuana to
some of their patients if it were legal. A 1992 study from Georgetown
University's School of Medicine found 170 cancer specialists ranked
cannabis sixth in management of severe, post-chemotherapy nausea and
vomiting.

Few argue there are no risks. In a policy paper, the Addiction
Research Foundation found heavy cannabis use may have negative health
consequences, including respiratory damage (when smoked), impaired
coordination, altered hormone production and damage to the immune
system, although, "by any accounting," the health impact of marijuana
is much less than alcohol or tobacco. "There is credible anecdotal
evidence that some people are helped for some conditions by medical
marijuana," says the ARF's Room. "People are resistant to the idea of
medication that is smoked for both good and not so rational reasons."

Opponents argue there is no convincing evidence, credible or
otherwise. Raju Hajela, president of the Canadian Society of Addiction
Medicine (an affiliate of the Canadian Medical Association), says
marijuana is not a first-line treatment for anything, the adverse
effects from smoking are the same as from tobacco, and its withdrawal
symptoms are similar to those of heroin. In a Dec. 12 press release he
said those arguing that marijuana is not harmful are doing it to "feed
their own addiction." In an interview, he said, "The most common thing
that's observed in anyone who even casually smokes marijuana is the
amotivational syndrome that develops, that people lose interest in
their day-to-day life situations."

Wayne Hindmarsh has fought marijuana acceptance for years, and says
there's no evidence the drug is better than what's already legally
available. "We do know that marijuana does have a lot of toxic
principles, and we've got to be careful as to the message that we're
giving to younger kids," he says. "That's certainly the thing that
concerns me. If you could prove scientifically that the joint is far
better than any medication that's out there for a particular problem
then we would have to go with that, but that hasn't been proven, in my
mind."

Marijuana critics often point to two synthetic versions of one of
cannabis' active ingredients, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC): Marinol and
Cesamet. Michelle Foisy, HIV primary care pharmacist at Toronto's
Wellesley Health Centre, says while the drugs are marketed for cancer
patients, they have been given to HIV patients for nausea and
vomiting, and to help them gain weight. Patients with prior marijuana
experience often appreciate the effects, or continue smoking it
themselves, but other patients aren't as receptive. "There
certainly is a high percentage of people who say, `Forget it. I don't
want to feel high. I have to concentrate on my job.'" She doesn't
recommend the medicinal use of marijuana. "From a smoking standpoint,
on a chronic basis, I don't know that you're doing your patient any
good. You might be alleviating one thing but then inducing something
else."

But many patients and doctors don't like synthetic THC, saying it's
unpalatable and, if they're trying to control nausea to be able to
take oral medications, ineffective. "When people are taking 40 pills a
day or more, or on chemotherapy, they have so much nausea that they
can't even take those pills, including the synthetic form (of THC).
That's where we have the problem," says Kilby. "They're taking their
joints about half an hour before they take their pills and then there
is immediate relief of nausea and there's stimulation of their
appetite and they tend to be able to hold down, not only the pills,
but hold down some food as well."

There's one other reason why some prefer cannabis to drug company
products, according to Beyerstein: "Marinol is very expensive, and
marijuana is very cheap." Kilby notes the appetite stimulant he
usually prescribes for AIDS patients, Megace, costs up to $3,000 a
month, and is not covered under Quebec's drug plan.

Even if marijuana use was allowed, would physicians prescribe it
appropriately? Before giving a patient marijuana, Hindmarsh says he'd
want to know, "What physicians have dealt with him? I'm not saying
anything against general practitioners at all, but has (the patient)
been treated by specialists? Have they exhausted all the possibilities
that are available?" Alan Young scoffs at the suggestion. "I have to
work on the assumption that doctors are going to do their job
properly, and if not it's a matter for the College of Physicians and
Surgeons. Doctors can prescribe a lot of narcotics, and that isn't a
reason to take away that power from them."

Whether doctors will ever get the opportunity is another matter; 25
years after the Le Dain Royal Commission advocated decriminalization,
penalties for possessions can still result in a criminal record, and
the maximum penalty for trafficking is life imprisonment. While some
police force officials in Ottawa and Vancouver have downplayed
marijuana possession as a priority, its use, medical or not, carries a
risk. "If the law's there we're going to enforce it," says Gilles
Brunet, national coordinator of the RCMP's drug awareness program. "If
it's still a criminal offence we can't ignore it. I don't think
things change because of (the Parker decision)." Some say government
policy could change under new Health Minister Allan Rock, who has
already shown support for the herbal medicine industry. In an
interview with the Ottawa Citizen, Rock said he would "look seriously
and with an open mind at the evidence in deciding on whether the
government should get out of the way and permit the use of a substance
for medical purposes." Another Liberal MP, Toronto doctor Carolyn
Bennett, has come out in favor of cannabis use by multiple sclerosis
patients. "(Allan Rock), of all ministers of health, is probably in
the best position to make a change to the law," says Aaron Hamett.
"Nobody, I think, who looks at the issue carefully, wants to put
someone in a jail cell for a month because they've got an ounce of
marijuana."

If there are any legal changes, pharmacists will have some work to do.
Hindmarsh concedes it's "not really a major part of our curriculum. I
teach toxicology here at this university to the pharmacy students, and
that's sort of the last area to be covered." Though their curricula
would likely differ, decriminalization advocate Beyerstein agrees. "It
would be a good idea to do a little bit of postgraduate work, because
that probably wasn't covered in the standard curriculum, but that
information is certainly widely available," he says. "They're
professionals, that's what they do well, and I think that
information should be made available to them through their continuing
re-certification or professional education."

What virtually everyone can agree on is that, with buyers' clubs,
requests to government for marijuana and a growing line of court
cases, the idea is not going away soon. The question for pharmacists
is what position they'll take. "You have a lot of parents that are
concerned about their children, and they're not going to give up
quietly," says Hindmarsh. "My only hope would be that the debate is a
good debate that is based on scientific principles and not just on
feelings."

Says Harnett, "I imagine we can return to a time when the pharmacist
would also be the producer of some of the herbs and medicines. I take
it that's where their origin comes from."

***

(SIDEBAR)

BY THE NUMBERS

From the Addiction Research Foundation report, Cannabis, Health and
Public Policy, published in December, 1997. The policy paper
concludes, "The justifiable concern with the health effects of
cannabis is not incompatible with a less punitive legal response to
the user."

* Portion of Canadian adults reporting cannabis use some time during their
life: 1 in 4

* Portion of Ontario junior high and high school students who used cannabis
in the past year: 1 in 4

* Percentage of Ontario Grade 11 students: 42

* Estimated annual health care costs in Ontario resulting from cannabis
use: $8 million

* Resulting from alcohol use: $442 million

* From tobacco use: $1.07 billion

* Maximum penalty for first-time possession of cannabis (under 30 grams of
marijuana or 1 gram of hashish): $1,000 fine and/or' six months in prison

* Maximum penalty for a second offence: $2,000 and/or 12 months in prison

* Maximum penalty for trafficking marijuana: life imprisonment

* Number of criminal convictions for cannabis possession since 1965: 700,000

* Percentage of drug-related charges in 1995 that involved cannabis: 64

* Per capita ratio of cannabis arrests in the rest of Ontario compared to
Metropolitan Toronto: 3:1

* Percentage of those convicted of cannabis possession admitting subsequent
use a year after their trial: 92

* Likelihood a cannabis user will be prosecuted in any given year: 1 per
cent

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Cannabis Campaign - The Drugs World War - What Went Wrong? (Britain's
'Independent On Sunday' Continues Its Weekly Push
For Marijuana Decriminalization With Second Of Two-Part
Historical Overview - 93-Year Sentence Of Will Foster By Oklahoma Is Cited,
As Well As 1996 US Attempt To Stop Australian 'Backsliding')

Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 16:20:35 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: UK: The Drugs World War - What went wrong? (Part 2)
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Zosimos 
Pubdate: 1 February 1998
Source: Independent on Sunday
Contact: sundayletters@independent.co.uk 	
Mail: Independent on Sunday 1 Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London E14 5DL
England

THE DRUGS WORLD WAR - WHAT WENT WRONG?

Part Two

The fight against drugs has been lost. Yet the US right continues to
squander vital resources on a worldwide, irrational crusade to rein in the
'evil perpetrators'

By Phillip Knightley

THE 25-year-old war against drugs has been lost but there are still
bitter-enders on both sides of the Atlantic who want to fight on. Like
American generals in Vietnam, they believe they see a light at the end of
the tunnel. Realists know that, rightly or wrongly, the campaign is over.

Imagine a courtroom scene in Oklahoma. The prosecutor is suggesting to the
jury the sentence it should recommend for a man who has been found guilty
of possession of cannabis. "Two hundred years, two thousand years . Just
pick a number and see how many zeros you can add on," he says. "Put this
druggie away and God will bless you all."

They did, and Will Foster, a computer software consultant, married with two
children, is now serving 93 years for growing marijuana plants for
cigarettes to relieve his chronic rheumatoid arthritis.

There are other examples of the draconian nature of American drug laws:
anyone convicted of drug dealing, or even an intention to do so, faces not
only imprisonment and a heavy fine but confiscation of almost all their
possessions, including their house - a display of wartime zeal, one
commentator said, that was the legal equivalent of a My Lai massacre.

And yet such harsh policies have simply not worked, and it is not
"wishy-washy liberals" who are leading the fight to recognise that the war
is lost but the backbone of the American right. The magazine National
Review, William F Buckley Jr's "keeper of the conservative tablets", says:
"The war on drugs has failed, it is diverting intelligent energy away from
the problem of how to deal with addiction; it is wasting our resources and
it is encouraging civil, judicial and police procedures associated with
police states . it is time to go home and to mobilise fresh thought on the
drug problem in the context of a free society."

At a conference last year at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University,
hardly a hotbed of drug-takers, Milton Friedman, the economist and Nobel
Prize winner, and George Schultz, former Secretary of State, agreed that
the war on drugs had not only failed miserably, but did not even have a
moral dimension.

Friedman says: "Can any policy, however high-minded, be moral if it leads
to widespread corruption, imprisons so many, has so racist an effect that
it destroys our inner-cities, wreaks havoc on misguided and vulnerable
individuals and brings death and destruction to foreign countries?"

Yet it is this bankrupt policy that the United States seems determined to
export to the rest of the world. And it is prepared to wage war, overt and
covert, to do so. The overt war is high- profile - raids, shoot-outs,
boardings and seizures on the high seas, crop destruction, invasions by
American troops.

Even here though, the might of American fire-power is meeting its match. A
recent search-and-destroy operation on the border between Afghanistan and
Pakistan was co-ordinated by the new chief of the United Nations Drug
Control Programme, Pino Arlacchi, whose qualifications for the job included
a tour of duty fighting the Mafia in Italy.

But Arlacchi discovered that it is no longer a matter of taking on a few
primitive farmers who protect their crops with antiquated firearms. The
flood of weapons into the area during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan
means that these farmers now own machine-guns, rocket launchers and
anti-aircraft missiles and they are prepared to use them. It is not
surprising, therefore, that opium production in Afghanistan has soared -
400 tons in 1980; 2,800 tons in 1996.

The covert war has been successful in a way that bodes ill for Britain's
new drugs tsar, Keith Hellawell. Britain is a signatory to long-standing
international treaties, some going back to the League of Nations, others
the work of the United Nations, that, whether we like it or not, tie us to
the American policy of total prohibition, of a world free of all
recreational drugs except alcohol and tobacco.

If any country wavers a little, or begins to suggest an easing of the laws
on marijuana as an experiment, or wants to try weaning addicts off heroin
by prescribing it for them, or even proposes having a debate on drugs
policy, then the covert battle will begin in earnest. The United States'
presence is President Clinton's chief international drugs enforcer, Bob
Gelbard, who is known to his friends and enemies as the State Department's
"diplomatic Doberman".

Two years ago this month, Gelbard flew into Australia. He had been alerted
to some worrying "backsliding" there by a State Department officer in the
United States embassy in Canberra, the Australian capital. Every American
embassy in most major countries now has an officer with a drugs
intelligence role, who is specially charged with keeping the Washington
authorities informed of any significant local developments.

The officer in Canberra was a woman in her late forties who had been seen
at every public meeting in Australia where drugs policy had been discussed,
and she reported two important developments to her masters in Washington
DC. The first was that an experimental scheme was being considered in the
Australian Capital Territory (ACT) under which doctors would prescribe
heroin for addicts (as once happened in Britain) and, secondly, that the
Prime Minister of the state of Victoria, Jeff Kennett, had appointed a Drug
Advisory Council to reconsider the state's laws on drugs which, by general
consensus, were not working.

GELBARD'S mission was meant to be secret, but American drugs warriors are
not very popular in Australia, where they are blamed for the country's
heroin problem, which did not exist until the 1970s. The accusation is that
when the war in Vietnam was over, the Drug Enforcement Administration
managed to stop heroin following the GIs home. Forced to find alternative
markets, the South-East Asian drug barons diverted heroin intended for the
United States to Australia and Britain.

So when Gelbard waved his big stick, some Australians working in the drugs
field were so outraged by what had happened that they have since spoken out
(principally to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Four Corners
programme and to writers David Marr and Bernard Lagan). Thanks to them, we
have details of a chilling example of Clinton's drugs enforcer in action.
It is the only case study I have come across - although we may assume that
similar missions have been sent secretly to this country, and will be sent
again if we happen to stray from the rigid American line.

Gelbard, an avuncular figure with grey hair and glasses, is a veteran of
the drugs war. He wrote the speech for Clinton in which the President said
that now that the Cold War was over, the next frontier was the war on
drugs. Gelbard was in Bolivia when the United States sent troops there in
order to try to wipe out the cocaine industry. He pushed for cutting off US
aid to Colombia because of its failure to curb its drug barons. He was
behind the American decision to cut trade with Burma over its opium
business. And he warned Nigeria's ruler, General Sani Abacha, about the
dangers of being involved in the drugs business.

Gelbard is a pragmatic diplomat who knows he is representing the most
powerful nation on earth and he is experienced at using that power to crush
any other country's attempts to liberalise its drugs laws. He wants to make
it clear that no nation can go it alone on drugs - as far as he is
concerned, the United States sets the agenda.

When Gelbard flew into Australia, the US embassy had already arranged for
him to meet Professor David Pennington, one of the country's leading
medical experts, who has accumulated widespread knowledge about drugs and
who is chairman of Victoria's Drug Advisory Council. Pennington was
perfectly willing to see Gelbard but he was puzzled that the US embassy set
up the meeting in Hobart, capital of the island state of Tasmania, rather
than in Canberra or Melbourne, the state capital.

The reason soon become apparent. Tasmania, the poorest of the Australian
states, has a licence from the American-dominated International Narcotics
Control Board (INCB) in Vienna to grow opium poppies under a quota system
for the legal manufacture of medicinal morphine and codeine. Tasmania
employs some 700 growers and two processors in this industry, between them
earning A$80m (£33m) a year, an important part of the island's economy.

For years the Australian federal government has hoped that the INCB could
be persuaded to lift Tasmania's quota for poppy production and therefore,
to keep in its good books, notified it of the proposed "heroin on
prescription" trial in the ACT.

The INCB replied that it would allow the trial to go ahead "provided it is
part of a genuine commitment by the Australian government to achieve a
drug-free society rather than a concession to living with drugs". The INCB
sticks to the American line that trials are dangerous because of the
message they send to heroin-producing countries - set up trials and behind
them you can do what you like. But like the drugs warriors, it too is
fighting a losing battle.

It has attacked both California and Arizona for allowing easy use of
cannabis "for alleged medical purposes"; it has congratulated Washington
for its firm stand against "such indirect attempts to legalise the drug";
and it has expressed its concern that reputable foundations have provided
sums of money in the United States for institutions that are "developing
strategies for the legalisation of drugs".

But the INCB is a UN agency set up to supervise drug treaties signed by
some 158 nations and it has the power to cut off the supply not only of
morphine-based drugs but of many essential pharmaceuticals to any nation
that incurs its displeasure.

So when the Tasmanian government received the INCB response to the proposed
"heroin trial" in Australia, it did not regard it as very reassuring, and
began to campaign against the trial in Canberra, claiming it was a foolish
exercise that could jeopardise a valuable local industry. Its concern
turned out to be justified.

Gelbard's meeting with Pennington took place in the office of Ron Cornish,
the Tasmania state Minister for Justice. Gelbard began by saying that he
was on the island simply to check out the opium industry, one he understood
to be "the most efficient producer of crude morphine and morphine-based
drugs in the world". Pennington was too polite to ask: if that's all you're
here for, why invite me to attend this meeting?

But then Gelbard moved on to a general discussion about the ACT heroin
trial and heroin trials in other parts of the world. He was scathing about
the Swiss decision to try prescription of heroin and contemptuous of the
Dutch attitude to all drugs. He took a very traditional law enforcement
position - heroin was too dangerous a substance to play about with. It was
imperative that the United States and its allies held the line. But, of
course, a heroin trial in the ACT was purely an Australian issue.
Washington would not dream of interfering in the affairs of a friendly
country.

Then, in private conversations with Pennington, Gelbard suddenly raised the
prospect of a bigger quota for the Tasmanian opium poppy industry. He had
been impressed with what he had seen in Tasmania and might be prepared to
push the Tasmanian poppy growers' case. "Let's wait and see," he said.

The message seemed clear - toe Washington's line on drugs and you will be
rewarded; go your own way and you will be punished. And Gelbard had played
on the rivalry between the Australian states and the Federal government
like a master diplomat. The state of Victoria and Pennington could plan
what drug reforms they liked, but they would come to nothing; the real
decisions on drug policy would be taken in Canberra, which had all the
authority because of its international treaty obligations.

In August last year the ACT heroin trial was abandoned, and instead the
Prime Minister, John Howard, launched a new, hard-hitting "National Illicit
Drug Strategy". Special strike teams would target drug syndicates, there
would be a concerted effort to make Australia a much more difficult target
for drug traffickers. Australia was going to get tough on drugs, real
tough. Some listeners thought that the Prime Minister's speech sounded as
if it had even been written for him by Bob Gelbard.

What is behind the irrational passion that the United States brings to the
war on drugs? What is it that motivates one American anti-drugs campaigner,
William Bennett, to call for the beheading of drug dealers, and the former
police chief of Los Angeles to suggest that even casual users should be
taken out of the courtroom after conviction and immediately shot?

In the early years of this century drugs were legal (or as the American
right says: "There was a free market in drugs"). In Britain and the United
States there were many recreational users of opium and cocaine and some
addicts, few of whom needed to finance their habit by crime. A far greater
number of people took their cocaine in highly-diluted forms, such as
patented medicines sold over the counter at chemist's shops and in
Coca-Cola. (Today's Coca-Cola contains caffeine instead of cocaine.)

But an anti-opium lobby had been around in the United States ever since the
Californian gold rushes. American racial contempt for the Chinese became
focused on their opium-smoking habits, and the Protestant missionary
societies in China, the Women's Christian Temperance Union, and other such
organisations set out on a crusade to protect the world, especially the
white world, from the horrors of opium.

In 1909 America called a conference in Shanghai to fight drugs through
international co-operation and in 1914, against the wishes of most of the
police forces in the United States, the Harrison Act criminalised drugs.
With the Treaty of Versailles after the First World War, Britain - which
had fought wars to protect its opium trade - tightened up to try to make
the world drug-free.

That this was a religious crusade rather then a law-and-order issue is
obvious by the rhetoric of today's anti-drug lobby. It speaks of
drug-taking as "immoral . a sin . an offence against God". A leading
American conservative supporter of the drug crusade, an intelligent,
rational man, conceded in debate that, yes, alcohol and tobacco were
unhealthy and could even cost lives. But illegal drugs were different
because "addiction to illegal drugs can result in the loss of your soul".

MANY anti-drugs crusaders believe that even the use of drugs to relieve
pain in the terminally ill is morally wrong. Leading drugs realists say
that the most pervasive drugs scandal in the United States today is the
refusal of many doctors to prescribe pain-killers for their patients in
case they come to the attention of the Drug Enforcement Administration for
over-prescribing.

Ethan A Nadelmann, director of the Lindsmith Center, a New York drug-policy
research institute, says: "The only reason for the failure to prescribe
adequate doses of pain-relieving opiates is the "opiaphobia" that causes
doctors to ignore the medical evidence, nurses to turn away from their
patients' cries of pain, and some patients themselves elect to suffer
debilitating and demoralising pain rather than submit to a proper dose of
drugs."

Such is the moral conviction of the drugs war warriors that it is difficult
to engage them in rational debate. Dr Thomas Szasz of the department of
Psychiatry at Syracuse University suggests that it is a waste of time
presenting facts to the anti-drug lobby to convince them that the war is
lost.

He says that the war on drugs is a mass movement characterised by the
demonising of certain objects and persons - "drugs", "addicts",
"traffickers" - as the incarnations of evil. Hence it is foolish to dwell
on the drug prohibitionist's failure to attain his avowed aims. "Since he
wages war on evil, his very effort is synonymous with success."

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Cannabis Campaign - Letters (Four Letters To Britain's
'Independent On Sunday' In Support Of Its Push For Marijuana Decriminalisation
Include One From Son Of Former Home Secretary)

Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 17:50:07 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: UK: Cannabis Campaign: Letters
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Zosimos 
Pubdate: Sunday, 1 Feb 1998
Source: Independent on Sunday
Contact: Email: cannabis@independent.co.uk
Mail: Independent on Sunday, 1 Canada Square
Canary Wharf, London E14 5DL England
Editors note: The IoS Cannabis Campaign has web pages at:
http://www.independent.co.uk/sindypot/index.htm

Letters

AS the son of a former Home Secretary, I couldn't help but sympathise with
William Straw after his entrapment by the Mirror. I was glad that he did not
suffer the usual fate of those who admit to the police they supplied drugs.

Do we still need to make the millions of occasional users endure breaking and
entering, and false imprisonment? By making possession an offence we make so
many otherwise law-abiding citizens into outlaws. We should also remember that
it was prohibition that made the Mafia strong and realise that this new
prohibition is nurturing animals whose organisations make the Mafia look like
Mensa.

Will Maudling, London

***

AT A recent meeting we voted unanimously in favour of decriminalising cannabis.
The assumption that cannabis users inevitably turn to harder drugs is
ridiculous. We can reduce the number who do by decriminalising cannabis,
thereby keeping ordinary users away from the criminal drugs world. If the sale
of cannabis were to be regulated, Liberal Democrats would tax it and channel
the extra revenue into under-funded health and education services.

Matt Davies, Durham University Liberal Democrat Youth and Students

***

IT IS time for the Government to take a good look at its drugs policy. I find
it hard to believe that all MPs think that drugs should continue to be illegal.
At the moment it seems that our government is simply based on reaction.

Alastair C Irvine

***

WILLIAM Straw's father has been duplicitous. William Straw supplied a class B
drug for profit in a pub when he was under 18. The important issues were not
freedom of the press and rights of privacy, but Jack Straw duping the press
with the spin induced by these frothy issues. This enables him to carry on
persecuting people who use cannabis for their own pleasure.

Commander (retd) Mick Humphreys, Somerset

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Campaign Supporters (Britain's 'Independent On Sunday' Prints The Names
Of Some Of The People With Medical And Academic Associations
Who Are Standing Up In Support Of Its 'Cannabis Campaign'
To End Marijuana Prohibition)

Date: Sun, 01 Feb 1998 18:28:53 -0500
To: DrugSense News Service 
From: Richard Lake 
Subject: MN: UK: Cannabis Campaign: Campaign Supporters
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Newshawk: Zosimos 
Pubdate: Sunday, 1 Feb 1998
Source: Independent on Sunday
Contact: Email: cannabis@independent.co.uk

CANNABIS CAMPAIGN -DECRIMINALISE CANNABIS

CAMPAIGN SUPPORTERS - ADD YOUR NAME TO THE LIST

MEDICAL/ACADEMIA

Norman Myers, CMG, environmental scientist

Robert Witter, MA, BSc, CQSW, London
John Cvancara, staff nurse, Nottingham

Dr Graham Pogrel, GP, Cumbria

Carole Pogrel, social worker, Youth Justice, Cumbria

POLITICS

Michael Hindley, Labour MEP for Lancashire South

LITERARY/ARTS

John Furnival, artist

Laurence Dale, opera singer, France

READERS

Clare McGarvin, USA

J & K Bowen, East Sussex

Fleur Edwards, Dean & T G Reynolds, Wales

S P Driscoll, Pauline McGregor, West Midlands

Tom Greenstock, Peter Loughnane, University of Surrey

Tasco Villiger, Jan Bahner, Holland

Stephane Pallvault, France

Eric Schledorn, Germany

Mason Baker, USA

Sarah Redhouse, Middlesex

Rachel Ianson, London

Martin Percossi, Christopher Blakesley, Will Luesley, Jonah Fox, Penny
Crossley, N Szeuxzyk-Morgan, Marie Welcomme, V Morgan, all London

William Caldwell, L Beattie, D Ward, all Glasgow

Vinette Pearson, Douglas Cruse, W Russell, E Henderson, Susan Little,
Alexander
McCubbin, all Scotland

John Lynch, Herts

Maureen, Ken & Matthew Bailey, Northants

Mandy Morley, Stamatia Polizou, Yiannis Vogiatzakis, Carabelas Dimitris, all
Greece

M Clarkson, I Henshan, L Betts, London

Vivienne & Geoffrey Brown, London

Michelle & S Brown, L Michie, S Duddal, Bournemouth, Hants

A Ellis, Poole, Dorset

Paul & Dominic Manzi, Dorset

Kari Kirkby, Camberley

B Mann, Christchurch

Pam Candler, Essex

Tirval Scott, David Pert, Shetland

Lee Walker, Sheffield

Stuart & Luke Payn, D Williams, Grant Brighten, P Milton, B Hall, Claire
Townsend, Gary Cook, all Peterborough

Luke Dacey, Bedfordshire

Amy Clarke, Huntingdon

Anthony & Dorothy Proctor, Stowmarket

Kevin Buck, Steve Elmes, V Wyatt, Marialda Etcheto, all London

April White, Mark Stanley, Jason Beonska, David Williams, Zoe Curbishley,
Dominik Daisenberger, Benjamin Beinrabe, London

Rowan Jean-Forster, Tamar-Ellen Harris, Tracey Henshaw, all Cleveland

Sarah Wright, Tim Symonds, Andy Macleod, Ryan Tebbit, Jeff Peters, London

Leonie Finnegan, Dorset

Andrew Hinde, M Johnson, V Sonbico, all Somerset

Lee Walker, Matthew Evans, N Hall, all London

William John McVicker, Wrexham

Melanie Sanders, Sam Johnson, London

Graham & Chris Holman, Joanna Brown, Bucks

Mark Thomas, Lloyd Kane, London

Simon W Quarton, Matthew Wood, Neil Snell, Shane Robinson, all Surrey

Kyle Lang, Jen Rock, Farahnaz Semat, Jack Pope, Dominic Reviue, Natalie Grant,
Louise Tait, Tom Chambers, all Scotland

Fiona Donlevy, Stella Boufanti, Hilary Sober, Jessica Neild, P Feltrin, Pino
Pastore, London
Rhiannon Edwards, Wales

Marianne Maunsell, London

Dave Womersley, London

Thomas Hinde, West Sussex

P Wymbs, V Hill, D Crosbie, all London

S Mayes, L Stabale, C Cole, L Bear, R Turner, S, M & P Skipper, Ann Acall, T
Cleary, all Norfolk

Roger Rees, Marc Everett, Stuart Crundwell, Kate & J Osborne, S Birdsall, all
London

Neil Chapman, Shropshire

James Dawson, USA

Roger Christie, Hawaii

Daniel Attwell, Wales

Natalie & Chris Carpenter, Matthew Irving, Elizabeth Lawrence, Stefan Leno,
Debbie Wells, Charles Duffy, S May, Andrew Stewart, Paul Smith, Anthony
Phelips, all Hants

Katherine & T Medway, S Taylor, Paul Trent, Mark Bolen, London

M Linton, Mark Andrews, Jon Wright, David Landschett, Hants

Jane Holdsworth, Duncan Josh, Brenda Taylor, Leah Taylor, all West Yorks

Mike, Charlotte, & Rita Wood, all Leighton Buzzard

Calum, Alan & A Graham, Glasgow

Troy Transka, L Tatlow, Jack Daniells, Glos

Caroline Laskowska, Jonathan Merricks, Simon Harrison, Hants

Hayley Shortt, Nottingham

John Breckon, Bristol

Karlos Gordobil, Iosu Lekue, Merseyside

Miss S E King, Taunton

C J Fairhurst, Neil Adamson, M Cooper, N Croft, C Buckley, David Montgomery,
Jodie Johnston, all Liverpool

I Osterlund, Surrey

Nicolas Scheidt, France

Alex Clow, Mark Burns, Essex

Graham Brew, Kilpeck, Hereford and Worcester

David Rossiter, Gary& David Imrie, Paul Wilkinson, all Tyne and Wear

A & P Rose, A Neeson, Paul Harding, L Ellens, David & L Jearum, all Hastings

Astrid, Mary, Georgina, Jack, & H Furnival, all Gloucester

Dilly & Martin Bohan, Sophie & Maria Campbell, Ros & Steve Elsey, Kate
Corby-Teuch, Sandie Flatt, J Howarth, Kate Harve, Chris Waller, Karen Erlam,
Simon Aylmer, Lali Shepherd, all Norfolk

Jessica Dunn, Colin Andrews, Sarah Kilpatrick, Gwlym Gweillam, Kevin Chicken,
Derek Mogford, Romilly Nolan all London

Pip & Richard Dean, Dorset

Jan Dargue, Dunblane

Hannah, Dale, & Stephen Ward, Argyll

Gary Byrnes, J Conroy, Dublin

Barry Thompson, Jeff James, Martin Butler, Geoff Hagen, Chris Mathews,
Robbie &
Jonathan Carlisle, Paul Crook, all Oxford

Simon Banham, Kym Brown, Elaine & Donna Kelly, Jan Godbold, Tim Mumford,
Rianne
Christie, G Deacon, S Villane, K Shawcroft, all Suffolk

Marcella D'Gama, London

Alex Gaskill, Alec Spendlore, Neil Murphy, all Newcastle upon Tyne

Alastair Jardine, Philip Rose, Nora Taylor, all Worcester

Magnus Bernine, Erlend Rasmussen, Darlington

Michelle & Michael Jacobs, Devon

Stewart Wade, R Chandler, Stephen Tighe, Philip Stephenson, London

Pavel Gronich, London

Martin Studnicka, Jan Martinec, Nada Alsova, Lubos Snizek, all Prague

Tom Andrews, Anne & H Price, Zoey Brace, Phil Gray, Tim Brindle, Matthew
Stockwell-Allen, all West Yorks

Nick Olive, Leicester

Emma Lewis, Kent

Jason Walpole, Sarah Durham, Andrea & Robert Dobson, Michael Halcomb, all
Northants

Wayne Shatford, J Marlow, Desborough

James & Sally Knight, London

Mark Evans, Rebecca Maguire, Victoria Brown, all West Sussex

Nicholas Boulton, Richard Attfield, Amanda Billige, all Surrey

John Fox, Ireland

Pat, Allan & Jack McGowan, Sam Byford, Hopi Allard, Howard Lindsay, all
Brighton

Julie Nesheim, Abbi Parent, London

Daren Ike, Trevor Archer, Pete Rigby, Graham Jones, A Morris, F Trevor, Martin
Smith, Philip Bufton, all Telford

Kirsten Gogan, A Dixon, Carey Driscill, Mihajlo Lekic, Steven Crawshaw, Murray
Jarvis, David Harper, Jo Carter, Emma Oxham, Emma Mason, Toby Gray, all
Bristol

James Parkinson, Brighton

K le Brocq, Jersey

Sarah Grimsey, Southampton

H Kelly, Agnes Bell, Deirdre Gogan, Kevin Bradley, Oli & Dan Gardner, M Allen,
all Leamington Spa

Matthew Finney, Andy Farries, Sam Hart, S Parry, all Warwick

M Main, Aldershot

P Smith, Farnborough

Karen Burns, Billingshurst

Ben Hostler, Jane Gallagher, Newport

Javier Mitra-Valdes, Banbury

Paul Williamson, Alex Cater, Hazel Campbell, Carlos Ortiz, Michael
Gillbrook, K
Middlemass, Derek Rutherford, A Torrance, all Edinburgh

Stuart Armstrong, Elizabeth Rae, Aberdeenshire

Sarah & David Salmon, Cathy Laing, Valerie Perin, all London

David & Jeffrey Pepper, Leon Batchelor, Kellee Knowles, Oliver Smith, Sarah
Evans, all Hastings

Dean Hunter, Jamie Sinclair, Paul Wheeldon, Derek & David Wedge, Adrian Best,
Mark Howell, Eddie Walker, S Harding, Sol Gaughan, Rachel Whittaker, all
Shropshire

Adam Hammond, Emily Thomas, all Manchester

Val de Chiara, Middlesex

Andrew Crabtree, Ian Green, West Yorks

L Jones, Gareth Crane, Chris Leeson, Stephen Taylor, all Lancs

G M & D Darbishire, Godalming

Colin Dunne, R Waller, David Ross, S Robertson, H Dobbs, P Wetherfield, Joe
Hanynes, all Sussex

Jane & Lisa Richards, Ian Bowers, Mark Merrick, Kim Harris, H Sherwood, David
Ancott, Mark Wood, all Derbyshire

Mitzi & R Baehr, Michael Zair, Robert Wall, Simon Rowe, Stephen Roberts, R
Hicks, Richard Eccles, all Somerset

Tim Buley, Oxford

Steven & Patsy Holmes, Brian Ferguson, Ryan Aitken, Craig Powell, Allan
Ritchie, Kyle Aitken, Duncan Hodgeson, all Gretna

John Godbehere, Andy Buxton, K Baker, all Sheffield

G Manners, Ione Bareau, York

Paul & Elizabeth Rushby, Doncaster

Lesley Rowe, Gavin Jones, Lower Gornal

P Bailey, Bristol

Tony & Billy Stephenson, Mark England, Devon

M Mellor, London

S Willoughby, Brighton

Richard Povall, Vashti Maclachlan, West Yorks

- Compiled by Tarquin Cooper

-------------------------------------------------------------------

[End]