-------------------------------------------------------------------
State Court Throws Out Crime Measure - The Ruling ('The Oregonian'
Notes The Oregon Supreme Court Voided The State's New Voter-Approved
'Victim's Rights' Bill Tuesday Because It Violated The State's
Constitutional Ban On Initiatives With More Than One
Constitutional Amendment - However, Because The 1997 Legislature
Passed Senate Bill 936, Which Enacted Most Of Measure 40 By Statute,
Many Provisions May Remain In Effect)
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 1998 12:54:21 -0400
To: DrugSense News Service (mapnews@mapinc.org)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US OR: State Court Throws Out
Crime Measure: The Ruling
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Phil Smith (pdxnorml@pdxnorml.org)
Source: The Oregonian
Contact: letters@news.oregonian.com
Mail: 1320 SW Broadway Portland, OR 97201
Website: http://www.oregonlive.com/
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Author: David R. Anderson, The Oregonian staff
STATE COURT THROWS OUT CRIME MEASURE: THE RULING
Justices Say Measure 40 Has Too Many Amendments
The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday used a narrow legal point to throw out
Measure 40, a sweeping initiative backed by crime victims' groups.
The court unanimously ruled that Measure 40, which voters approved in
November 1996, violated the state constitution because it contained more
than one constitutional amendment. The court did not address the
constitutionality of specific provisions, which include allowing
convictions in murder cases on an 11-1 jury vote and making it more
difficult to exclude evidence.
And because the 1997 Legislature passed a bill that enacted most of Measure
40 as state statute, many provisions could remain. It could take future
rulings by the court on individual provisions to sort out their legality.
The ruling is not expected to overturn many convictions. Both sides in the
debate said the significance of the ruling is the effect on the initiative
system.
"The practice lately has been to draft an initiative that's a Christmas
wish list for some special-interest group and put everything they possibly
can into it that they can't get passed by the Legislature," said Thomas
Christ, who argued the case for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Opponents said the measure was not about crime victims' rights but about
making it easier to convict defendants. Voters should be able to consider
complex provisions separately, they said.
But supporters of the measure said its single purpose was to make crime
victims' rights equal to the rights of criminal defendants. They said the
court used a technicality to make it more difficult to pass initiatives.
"We're going to have juries deprived of hearing relevant evidence because
those people in Salem want to keep that evidence from them based on their
desire to enforce esoteric constitutional principles they've made up," said
Norm Frink, a Multnomah County chief deputy district attorney. "I'm afraid
the court has reached critical mass as far as politicizing itself."
The ACLU, in a case that originated in Marion County, presented three
arguments to the court.
The court did not agree with the first two, that the initiative contained
more than one subject or that it was such a substantial change to the
constitution that it represented a revision, which must be referred to
voters by the Legislature.
Instead, in Chief Justice Wallace P. Carson Jr.'s 69-page opinion, the
court used the multiple-amendment argument, which no lower court had used
to strike down the measure.
Measure not heavily used
Both sides agree that few cases relied so heavily on the measure that they
will have to be retried or thrown out.
"I don't think there will be a lot because, from the beginning, prosecutors
and judges had grave doubts about the validity of Measure 40 and, in a lot
of cases, stayed away from it," said Paul Levy, a defense lawyer with
Metropolitan Public Defenders in Portland.
In Multnomah County, some drug cases could be overturned because evidence
from searches might be ruled inadmissible, Frink said.
Peter Cogswell, spokesman for Attorney General Hardy Myers, said the
court's vote clearly kills two provisions of Senate Bill 936, which enacted
the measure: The 11-1 convictions in murder cases and restrictions on
pretrial release of defendants. However, no one has been convicted of
murder in Oregon on an 11-1 vote, and many circuit courts rejected the
pretrial custody section.
Cogswell said many provisions will remain in effect, such as requiring
district attorneys to consult victims about plea bargains, allowing
evidence of previous arrests into trials and giving victims the right to
restitution.
But Levy said allowing evidence of previous arrests might be found
unconstitutional. Other provisions, such as requiring jurors in criminal
cases to be registered voters and giving prosecutors the right to demand a
jury trial instead of a bench trial also might be unconstitutional.
"There's still a lot of open questions and doubt what remains viable in
(Senate Bill) 936, and it's going to be the subject of a lot of
litigation," Levy said.
Search law in question
One other issue that must be resolved is how Thursday's ruling affects
another law passed by the 1997 Legislature that gives police greater search
powers, such as asking about drugs during stops for traffic violations.
That law was passed with the assumption that Measure 40 amended the state
constitution, Cogswell said.
Steve Doell, a Measure 40 supporter and president of Crime Victims United,
called the decision an "unprincipled exercise of raw political power" by
the Supreme Court.
"It's a sad day for people who have been victims of crimes," Doell said.
Doell said his group has three options. The most attractive is to have a
special session of the Legislature split the measure into two or three
constitutional amendments and send them to voters in November.
Doell said that if the issue is not taken up during a special session, he
would ask the 1999 Legislature to send measures to voters. The
least-attractive option is to start from scratch, refile the initiatives
and collect signatures on new measures. That would mean voters might not
see the measures until November 2000, Doell said.
Even though many provisions are state law, supporters say it is important
to make them part of the constitution to protect them from changes by
lawmakers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
State Court Throws Out Crime Measure - The Process ('The Oregonian'
Further Weighs The Import Of Thursday's Ruling By The Oregon Supreme Court
Tossing Out The Measure 40 'Victim's Rights' Initiative)
The Oregonian
letters to editor:
letters@news.oregonian.com
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, OR 97201
Web: http://www.oregonlive.com/
State court throws out crime measure: The process
* The initiative system has a new interpretation
Friday, June 26 1998
By Ashbel S. Green
and Steve Suo
of The Oregonian staff
The Oregon Supreme Court on Thursday raised the bar for amending the state
constitution.
In striking down Measure 40, a multifaceted anti-crime initiative, the court
rolled out a new interpretation of the powers of the citizen initiative
process. The message of the unanimous court was: When amending the
constitution, keep it simple.
"This is a very activist decision by the Supreme Court," said Jim Westwood,
a Portland lawyer who ran third in the May 19 primary for an open seat on
the court. "They seem to be taking the bit in their teeth and running. It's
the court almost making new law."
Critics of the 1996 initiative applauded the decision, while supporters
decried it. Although it might take years to see the full effect, Thursday's
ruling has had three immediate effects:
• Victims' rights advocates called for the Legislature to send Measure 40
back to the ballot in a form that can pass Supreme Court scrutiny. That
could happen as soon as next month. Gov. John Kitzhaber has called a special
session for late July or early August to address the Wilsonville prison. The
Measure 40 issue could be raised during that session.
• Several multifaceted initiatives now circulating, including one involving
gay rights and another involving elections and union dues, seem vulnerable
to a new sort of legal attack if they make it to the Nov. 3 ballot and
voters approve them.
• Critics of the initiative system will intensify their calls for changes,
from requiring pre-ballot review of proposals to upending Thursday's court
ruling.
"It absolutely reaffirms the fact that we should have the opportunity . . .
to have a process that allows the best possible scrutiny of a proposed
measure," said House Speaker Lynn Lundquist, R-Powell Butte, a critic of the
system.
The decision was not surprising simply because the court overturned a
voter-approved initiative. It is the fifth time in the past three years that
courts have declared initiatives unconstitutional.
What's different is that the court did not address the substance of Measure
40, which expanded search-and-seizure laws, eliminated the requirement that
a murder conviction be by unanimous verdict and made other changes that
affect how criminal suspects are prosecuted.
Instead, the court ruled that Measure 40 was at least two different
constitutional amendments, and the Oregon Constitution prohibits packaging
more than one amendment into a single citizen initiative.
Reaching back to the Indiana constitutional convention, which was the basis
for the Oregon Constitution, the court wrote: "The convention debates
indicate that the purpose of the prohibition was to avoid voter confusion."
What's more surprising about the decision is that in the past the court
routinely has rejected similar procedural arguments. Specifically, the court
has rebuffed claims that initiatives violated the "single-subject rule,"
which requires that initiatives address only one topic.
Sponsor says it's "sad day"
Steve Doell, president of Crime Victims United, which sponsored Measure 40,
attacked the ruling.
"It's a sad day for the voters of Oregon, who have had their will thwarted
one more time," he said.
Others applauded the decision, saying it is an improvement to the initiative
system.
"This is a huge development to protect the integrity of the initiative
process in Oregon," said Dave Fidanque, executive director of the American
Civil Liberties Union of Oregon.
The effect, legal experts say, will be that constitutional amendments that
go before voters will be less sweeping than Measure 40.
How narrowly the court intends its order to be interpreted won't be known
until the future. In the meantime, Doell demanded the Legislature send
Measure 40 back to voters in whatever way it takes to pass.
If critics have their way, the Legislature also will address problems with
the initiative system. More than 80 bills to change the initiative system
were introduced during the 1997 session. Lundquist proposed an independent
citizens' review panel to study initiatives' constitutionality before they
reach the ballot. That bill failed, as did all other substantive changes
proposed during the session.
"Let's face it, it's 30-second sound bites that pass initiative proposals,"
Lundquist said. "Does this overcome all that? No. But it's a step in the
right direction."
Decision may spark challenges
In the immediate future, Thursday's decision seems to invite legal
challenges to proposed constitutional amendments circulating for the Nov. 3
ballot.
Two multifaceted proposals include an initiative sponsored by the Oregon
Citizens Alliance that would restrict gay rights and a union-sponsored
proposal that would change campaign finance laws.
"I think there will probably be a flurry of litigation with respect to any
of the proposed amendments on these very grounds," said John DiLorenzo, a
Republican lawyer who has successfully challenged initiatives.
In response to the ruling Thursday, the Oregon attorney general's office
said it is looking ahead to the 2000 election. Initiative sponsors would not
be allowed to circulate petitions if the proposals violate the court's new
single-amendment rule.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical Marijuana Distribution Bill Stalls In Face Of Lungren's Opposition
(Bulletin From California NORML Says State Senator John Vasconcellos' Bill
To Allow Local Governments To Establish Medical Marijuana Distribution
Programs, SB 1887, Fell Two Votes Shy Of Passage In The Assembly
Health Committee Today, Certifying Its Failure)
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 10:38:26 -0800
To: dpfca@drugsense.org, aro@drugsense.org
From: canorml@igc.apc.org (Dale Gieringer)
Subject: DPFCA: Cal Med MJ Bill Stalls
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/
Medical MJ Distribution Bill Stalls in Face of Lungren's Opposition
SACRAMENTO, Jun 30, 1998: Sen. Vasconcellos' bill to allow local
governments to establish medical marijuana distribution programs, SB 1887,
fell two votes shy of passage in the Assembly Health Committee today.
Sen. Vasconcellos argued that his bill was a response to the
mandate of Proposition 215, which called on the government to "implement a
plan to provide for the safe and affordable distribution to all patients in
medical need."
Dr. Jane Gurley of the San Francisco Department of Health testified
in favor of SB 1887, saying that the city of San Francisco would like to
establish a medical marijuana program of its own.
However, SB 1887 was sharply attacked by John Gordonier of the
Attorney General's office, who warned that it would legalize cannabis
clubs, which he described as a "public nuisance" and "drug houses," citing
a recent court decision against Dennis Peron's San Francisco Cultivator's
Club.
Gordonier attacked SB 1887 on three grounds: first, its reliance
on local control by cities and counties, which he called "most
unfortunate," in light of their tolerance of cannabis clubs. Secondly,
Gordonier argued that SB 1887 violated federal law. Finally, he claimed
that it was not what voters intended in passing Prop. 215.
In a spirited attack, Assemblyman Edward Vincent (D), ex-mayor of
Inglewood, called Gordonier's testimony "offensive" to city officials like
himself. He drew laughs poking fun at prohibitionist testimony from the
Committee on Moral Concerns, saying "These guys who are moral - they smoke
marijuana, too."
Voting on the bill followed party lines, but abstention by moderate
Democrats left the "ayes" short of a majority. Although SB 1887 is
eligible for reconsideration by the committee, its prospects for becoming
law are dead given the certainty of a veto from Gov. Wilson.
California NORML is still hopeful that Sen. Vasconcellos' other
medical marijuana bill, SB 535, which would establish a research program,
and which is supported by Attorney General Lungren, will be passed by the
legislature.
***
Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // canorml@igc.apc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Media Blitz Aims To Stem 'Monster' Meth Problem
('The San Diego Union Tribune' Says California Attorney General Dan Lungren
Yesterday Announced A New $18.2 Million Federally Funded Anti-Methamphetamine
Media Blitz, Including Television, Radio And Billboard Ads
And A World Wide Web Site - The Grant Will Also Finance The Hiring
Of 131 Narcotics Agents, Criminologists And Lab Technicians)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: "MN" (mapnews@mapinc.org)
Subject: MN: US: CA: Media Blitz Aims
To Stem 'Monster' Meth Problem
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 07:09:03 -0500
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project
http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
NewsHawk: John Harper
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Source: San Diego Union Tribune (CA)
Contact: letters@uniontrib.com
Website: http://www.uniontrib.com/
MEDIA BLITZ AIMS TO STEM 'MONSTER' METH PROBLEM
SACRAMENTO - Attorney General Dan Lungren introduced a federally funded
media campaign yesterday meant to stem the use of methamphetamine, a
powerful stimulant he said has "spread like a cancer throughout this state."
The campaign features television, radio and billboard ads discouraging meth
use and a new World Wide Web site where users can find information on the
drug known variously as "meth" and "crank."
More than other illegal substances, meth presents a multitude of challenges
for law enforcement, said Lungren, the Republican nominee for governor.
Users become paranoid and violent; manufacturing the drug involves a brew of
volatile chemicals; and those who "cook" meth often damage the environment
by dumping those chemicals.
"I don't know of any other drug that has all of these evil manifestations,"
Lungren said at the University of California Davis Medical Center.
"California's methamphetamine problem is truly a multiheaded monster. The
consequences of using the drug and the costs and danger associated with the
aftermath of environmental hazards all need to be addressed," he said.
To heighten public awareness of the drug, Lungren said, his office will tap
an $18.2 million federal grant that it requested several months ago.
Some $1.8 million will go toward a public education campaign. The grant
financed the production of the ads, and the state will spend $900,000 of the
federal money on placing the broadcast ads.
The grant money will also finance the hiring of 131 narcotics agents,
criminologists and lab technicians, Lungren said.
The attorney general showed reporters two TV spots that were to begin airing
yesterday. Two other spots are planned.
One ad shows an inviting, lush forest tainted by a man who dumps meth
byproducts. A boy is heard saying, "Hey, Dad, look at this!" as the camera
shows a dead bunny.
The other spot portrays a creepy world as seen through the eyes of a meth
user. At the end, a young man pulls a gun on his own family.
The campaign also includes 55 billboards that are to be rotated throughout
the state. One, displayed at the news conference, reads, "Where meth goes,
violence follows."
All the signs direct the public to a Web site launched late Sunday that
dispenses information on meth and other drugs.
Last year, the state Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement raided 977 meth labs,
more than triple the number from 1990. Local authorities seized an
additional 713 labs in the state last year.
Although other states are experiencing meth problems, the manufacture and
use of the drug is worst in California, Lungren said.
The problem is so bad here that the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency recently
labeled California "a source nation" for meth production and distribution,
Lungren said.
"Methamphetamine has been manufactured here . . . for decades. It is not
something new. While once considered the poor man's cocaine, however, meth
use and production has now spread like a cancer throughout this state,"
Lungren said.
Meth is sold in powder or pill form and can be smoked, snorted, swallowed or
injected. Methamphetamine typically costs $600 to $800 an ounce. Most people
on the street buy the drug in quarter-gram or gram increments. A
quarter-gram goes for about $20, said state Department of Justice spokesman
Bill Maile.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
San Francisco Housing Investigation Broadens ('The San Francisco Chronicle'
Says A California State Grand Jury Is Investigating Whether San Francisco
Housing Authority Employees Are Using Federal Property As A Base
For Drug Trafficking)
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 17:45:31 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: S.F. Housing Investigation Broadens
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: tjeffoc@sirius.com (Tom O'Connell)
Source: San Francisco Chronicle (CA)
Contact: chronletters@sfgate.com
Website: http://www.sfgate.com/chronicle/
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jul 1998
Author: Bill Wallace, Jaxon Vanderbeken, Chronicle Staff Writers
S.F. HOUSING INVESTIGATION BROADENS
State grand jury probes drug dealing at projects
A state grand jury is investigating whether San Francisco Housing Authority
employees are using federal property as a base for drug trafficking,
authorities said yesterday.
The investigation is the latest piece of bad news for Housing Authority
Executive Director Ronnie Davis, who was appointed by Mayor Willie Brown in
1996 to fix long-standing problems at the agency. Davis himself is
embroiled in a federal grand jury investigation of questionable financial
dealings at the Cleveland housing authority, where he worked before coming
to San Francisco.
Sources close to the state grand jury investigation said the panel is
probing a narcotics conspiracy that allegedly operated in the Hunters Point
and Potrero Hill housing projects and elsewhere in the city.
One employee under investigation helps coordinate maintenance work at the
Hunters Point project, a law enforcement source said. The staff member is
one of three Housing Authority workers suspected of participating in or
assisting the drug trade and a target in the state and federal probe, the
source said.
The grand jury investigation grows out of an FBI probe called Operation
Hardstone, which already has resulted in the convictions of 18 suspects in
the Potrero Hill and Hunters Point projects.
Ron Sonenshine, a spokesman for the Housing Authority, said agency
officials had no information about the grand jury probe.
The new inquiry does not appear to be directly related to two federal
investigations involving the Housing Authority or Davis.
One of those is a federal grand jury investigation into an unusual
arrangement in which the head of the Cuyahoga Metropolitan Housing
Authority in Ohio was able to use agency money to pay the mortgage on her
condominium in suburban Washington, D.C. Davis was chief operations officer
of the Cleveland agency at the time and received a letter authorizing the
payments that bore the signatures of three agency directors. The three
denied seeing the letter.
Another inquiry is a federal civil rights investigation of Personal
Protective Services of San Mateo, the private security service that Davis
hired last year to guard four of the city's housing projects.
Davis declined a request for an interview yesterday but responded to
written questions.
He denied that he was the target of the Cleveland grand jury probe and also
denied involvement in any financial misconduct while he was at the agency.
He said he has not been summoned before the federal grand jury in Ohio and
has not been interviewed by investigators. An FBI agent in San Francisco
has asked to talk to him about the Cleveland probe, but no interview has
been scheduled yet, he said.
Davis said he has not been contacted by investigators assigned to the civil
rights investigation of Personal Protective Services and has no information
about the probe.
He said the company had been hired through normal agency procedures, and
the Housing Authority is not reconsidering the contract in light of the
investigation.
OFFICIALS CLOSE RANKS
Despite the growing number of agencies looking into alleged misconduct at
the San Francisco Housing Authority, city officials closed ranks around
Davis yesterday.
Brown, who appointed Davis to run the agency a year after he engineered the
ouster of the authority commission, said he is unimpressed by the fact that
various agencies are looking into the Housing Authority or its director.
``Investigations are investigations,'' Brown said. ``Wait for the events to
unfold and then write about them.''
The civil rights inquiry is being conducted by the U.S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development, the U.S. attorney's office and the San
Francisco Police Department and district attorney.
It began after a Personal Protective Services guard allegedly clubbed an
unarmed man who was already in police custody last year. The incident is
one of five in which employees of the firm have been accused of violating
the civil rights of citizens since starting patrols at the North Beach,
Alemany, Valencia Gardens and West Side Courts projects.
In three of the incidents, guards allegedly clubbed or manhandled victims.
In one, guards are accused of planting drugs in a public housing tenant's
mailbox in order to have her evicted. In another, a guard is accused of
firing two shots at a moving automobile.
By law, the guards are simply supposed to monitor the projects and report
any crimes to police. They have no greater arrest power than any other
citizen. They can carry guns and are allowed to fire in self-defense.
LAWYER DECLINES COMMENT
Alicia Rockwell, the lawyer who represents Personal Protective Services,
declined to comment on the investigation and said she had advised the
company's president, Stan Teets, not to talk to the press.
The investigation began when Jahi Johnson, 25, was hit with a flashlight by
one of the private guards after he was subdued by police April 10, 1997, at
15th and Valencia streets.
According to a police report, guard Daniel Waymon Owens was present when
two officers arrested Johnson for fighting.
``As I was holding Johnson, Owens came up and struck him in the lower head
or neck area with a black metal flashlight two times,'' one of the officers
wrote in the report. ``I told Owens to `back off' from Johnson, which he
did.''
No charges were lodged as a result of the scuffle, but Johnson sued the
company in San Francisco Superior Court asking unspecified damages.
Court records and police reports describe four other incidents involving
employees of Personal Protective Services:
-- Guard Frank Tisdale fired two rounds at a fleeing motorist near the
Alice Griffith projects on June 11, according to San Francisco police
reports. Tisdale said the driver of vehicle, Ronnie Whittenberg, was under
a court order to stay away from the project, but did not obey Tisdale's
order to stop and tried to run him down. Whittenberg denied the guard's
account.
-- Guards Jose Villagomez and Marcelino Saldana are awaiting trial on
charges of beating a man with a nightstick and an umbrella in a San
Francisco convenience market February 20. Each has been charged with
assault with a deadly weapon.
Their alleged victim, Richard Brooks, said the guards started the fight by
taunting him about wearing yellow and bumping him. The guards maintain that
Brooks verbally abused them, spat in Saldana's face and began fighting when
Saldana pushed him away. Both have pleaded not guilty.
-- Guard Scott Wayne Willie is being sued by a woman named Willie Ann
Townshend, who says Willie grabbed and stomped her, twisted her arm and
placed her in handcuffs during a confrontation at Valencia Gardens on
February 1. In a response filed in Superior Court, attorneys for Personal
Protective Services deny Townshend's allegations.
-- Guards Michael Escobar, Eric Eierman and Jerry Mogannom have been sued
by a woman named Nea Porter, who says they planted drugs in her mailbox in
April 1997 to force her eviction from Valencia Gardens. In papers filed by
Personal Protective Services, the guards deny Porter's allegation.
GUARDS WIN PRAISE
Housing Authority officials said they are pleased with Personal Protective
Services and believe the firm has played an important role in reducing
crime in the projects.
Sulu Palega, president of the Housing Authority's board of directors, said
the misconduct allegations against the guards are being generated by people
who are criminals themselves.
``The complaints I've gotten are from people who are dirty and who are
involved in some of the unwanted activity that the guards were hired to
stop,'' he said.
Palega said some of the guards may have been overly aggressive, but he
insisted that they have performed a public service.
``Maybe some of them are out of whack, but we need security guards who are
able to protect people and ensure their safety,'' he said. ``The `Death
Valley' thing (in the projects) is over. We are trying to put an end to
that.''
Davis received a vote of confidence yesterday from three members of the
Board of Supervisors. One of them, Supervisor Sue Bierman, said, ``He has
done some really dramatic things for the people in public housing. . . . He
has shown tremendous respect for people who live in public housing. I hope
(the investigators) go slow on this.''
1998 San Francisco Chronicle Page A1
-------------------------------------------------------------------
At SFPD, 14 Guns Turn Up Missing (According To 'The San Francisco Examiner,'
San Francisco Police Chief Fred Lau Said Monday The Department Is Trying
To Account For 14 Handguns Lent To Officers While On Temporary Duty
With The Narcotics Division)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: "MN" (mapnews@mapinc.org)
Subject: MN: US: CA: At SFPD, 14 Guns Turn Up Missing
Date: Thu, 2 Jul 1998 07:11:04 -0500
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)
Contact: letters@examiner.com
Website: http://www.examiner.com/
Author: Lance Williams
AT SFPD, 14 GUNS TURN UP MISSING
The San Francisco police lost 14 of their guns.
Chief Fred Lau said Monday that the department is trying to account for 14
handguns lent in recent years to officers while on temporary duty with the
narcotics division.
The officers were given specialized firearms to use while working as
undercover officers or on drug stakeouts, Lau said. But they apparently
didn't return the weapons when they went back to their regular posts.
According to a department-wide bulletin, the unaccounted-for guns include
such small and nonstandard weaponry as two Smith & Wesson snub-nose
.38-caliber revolvers, two Beretta automatic pistols, a French Manurhin
revolver, and three Walther PPK automatic pistols, the handgun favored by
the fictional British spy James Bond.
The missing guns also include three Smith & Wesson .357 Magnum revolvers,
the department's primary on-duty weapon.
The bulletin, issued by Lau in May, warned officers that the guns would be
listed in law-enforcement computers as stolen if they were not accounted
for.
Lau said that since he issued his bulletin on the guns, several had been
found at the police firing range.
To recover the rest, "we're going back to everybody who has been assigned to
the narcotics unit," Lau said. "We're very confident we're going to find
them all.
"It's something we don't want to have happen again. We have issued tighter
controls, and I have had discussions with the deputy chief in charge of
investigations.
"But we don't believe the guns are anywhere other than in the possession of
police officers."
Lou Reiter, a law enforcement consultant and retired deputy police chief in
Los Angeles, says it's critically important for law-enforcement agencies to
keep close tabs on their firearms.
When police weapons are lost, public confidence in law enforcement can be
shaken, he said -- especially if the guns wind up in the hands of criminals.
"If you can't keep track of your weapons, which can cause death, people will
say: How can we guarantee you're using all your other stuff in a reasonable
manner?" Reiter said. "It would be real embarrassing if Joe Badguy comes up
with one of these guns, and they're hot ticket commodities on the street."
Reiter said the case of missing guns in San Francisco, as described to him
by an Examiner reporter, was cause for concern.
"Something's off there, in terms of losing that many weapons," he said. "You
may have misconduct, or officers who have simply kept them."
Lau said he learned of the missing guns after ordering an inventory of
narcotics division equipment earlier this year when the new division
commander, Capt. John Gleason, took over.
In addition to the missing firearms, the inventory could not account for 18
small two-way radios, also used in undercover work.
Like the guns, the radios had been assigned to officers on temporary duty in
narcotics, but then the department lost track of them.
Lau also issued a bulletin to track down the missing radios. All of them
have been found, many in the department's communications division, he said.
He said problems have arisen because the narcotics division uses so many
officers from elsewhere in the department.
"Sometimes we'll detail officers from district stations to come in (to the
narcotics unit) for some operations," he said. "Often they can't use the
standard firearms they are issued, so they are loaned specialized weapons,
for undercover operations, for example.
"I want to be very proactive on this, and adjust our procedures so that it
doesn't happen again."
John Crew, head of the American Civil Liberties Union's police practices
project, said the missing guns suggested that procedures were too lax in the
narcotics squad, which he said has long been known for "loosey-goosey"
behavior. "This sets off alarms in terms of public safety, and sounds alarms
about how careful they are on other issues," Crew said.
1998 San Francisco Examiner
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Who Guards The Guards? (Staff Editorial In 'The Orange County Register'
Discusses A New Report From The California Department Of Corrections
About Brutality Against Prisoners At Corcoran State Prison, Noting The Report
Concludes That Management At Corcoran 'Engaged In Selective Coverup
Of Excessive Force,' And Says Charges That 'The Shroud Was Thrown Over
This Investigation By Dan Lungren' Have A 'Certain Amount Of Plausibility')
Date: Wed, 01 Jul 1998 19:29:49 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Editorial: Who Guards The Guards?
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk:John W.Black
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Source: Orange County Register (CA)
Contact: letters@link.freedom.com
Website: http://www.ocregister.com/
WHO GUARDS THE GUARDS?
A new report from the California Department of Corrections about Corcoran
State Prison in the San Joaquin Valley hardly instills confidence that
allegations of sometimes shocking brutality by prison guards in California
prisons were the product of fevered imaginations. Furthermore, the report
concludes that management at Corcoran "engaged in selective coverup of
excessive force."
And what the CDC investigators uncovered at Corcoran might be only a
fraction of the cases of excessive force there. At the request of Attorney
General Dan Lungren, prison staff were not compelled to cooperate with the
investigative effort, so 80 percent of the Corcoran staff did not cooperate.
Rob Stutzman of the attorney general's office says this is because the
Department of Justice is conducting its own investigation and that penal
officers who are forced to cooperate with an internal investigation cannot
have that information used against them in a subsequent criminal case.
But the DOJ investigation has not resulted in criminal complaints at
Corcoran, so charges by critics like Cory Weinstein of California Prison
Focus in San Francisco that "the shroud was thrown over this investigation
by Dan Lungren" have a certain amount of plausibility.
After newspaper investigations, the Department of Corrections formed a task
force in November 1996 to investigate Corcoran. It found at least 13
confirmed case of coverups of the use of excessive force in incidents
ranging from staged fights between inmates to a guard slapping a prisoner in
handcuffs to a threat by a guard to kill a prisoner to the setting up a rape
of one inmate by another.
In some instances, prison officers who were themselves the focus of
accusations or who were "critical witnesses to alleged misconduct" carried
out investigations themselves and found nothing that required discipline.
The problem of "who shall guard the guards" has troubled political theorists
since the time of the ancient Greeks.
It is especially difficult in prisons, where the guards must sometimes
control the behavior of violent people, some of whom believe they have
nothing left to lose.
But the difficulty of the task does not excuse the initiation of violence by
those who are supposed to represent the forces of civilization. When
authorities cover up such excesses, it compounds the degradation of
civilized values.
The CDC task force has performed a service in documenting misconduct and
coverups at Corcoran. Allowing media reporters more access to prisoners
would provide yet another check on prison guard misconduct, but the
corrections department limited such access a couple of years ago. Despite
complaints and hearings, that policy has not been changed. It should be.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Time For A Change (A Letter To The Editor Of 'The Fresno Bee'
Says The Newspaper's 'Surrender' Headline Over A Column
About The Open Letter Opposing The Global Drug War, Signed By 500
World Leaders, Was Inappropriate - 'Any Military Person Will Tell You
That In A War When A Strategy Or Tactic Makes The Enemy Stronger,
Better Equipped And More Able To Resist, That It Is Time To Change
That Strategy Or Tactic - This Is Not Surrender')
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 21:09:03 -0400
To: DrugSense News Service (mapnews@mapinc.org)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: PUB LTE: Time For A Change
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Stinkys'
Pubdate: Tue, 30 June 1998
Source: Fresno Bee, The
Contact: letters@fresnobee.com
Website: http://www.fresnobee.com/
Author: Larry Johnson
TIME FOR A CHANGE
As I opened my June 28 Bee, the Vision section dropped out, and to my
surprise there was a column which stated that the "war on drugs is now
causing more harm than drug abuse itself." Could it be that after years of
failure at every step, people are finally beginning to realize the truth of
that statement?
Sadly, this article runs under the headline "Surrender," which is blatantly
wrong. Any military person will tell you that in a war when a strategy or
tactic makes the enemy stronger, better equipped and more able to resist,
that it is time to change that strategy or tactic. This is not "surrender";
this is just plain smart.
It is time to decriminalize all currently illegal drugs, empty our prisons
of nonviolent drug offenders and let our police get back to the basics of
law enforcement. As scary as that might seem, when one considers the years
of terror perpetuated by drug prohibition, the billions of wasted public
funds and the millions of lives ruined by enforcement of a failed policy,
there is no other reasonable course of action.
Larry Johnson
Clovis
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill To Allow Smoking In Bars Is Killed ('The San Jose Mercury News'
Notes California's Unique Prohibition On Tobacco Use In Bars Was Saved Monday
By An 8-8 Vote Along Party Lines In The California Assembly's
Local Government Committee)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 22:43:40 -0800
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US CA: Bill To Allow Smoking In Bars Is Killed
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Marcus-Mermelstein Family (mmfamily@ix.netcom.com)
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Source: San Jose Mercury News (CA)
Contact: letters@sjmercury.com
Website: http://www.sjmercury.com/
Author: Hallye Jordan Mercury News Sacramento Bureau
BILL TO ALLOW SMOKING IN BARS IS KILLED
Assembly Committee Rejects Plan
SACRAMENTO -- Yet another attempt to allow smokers back into California
bars was snuffed out Monday, but tavern employees who want to light up in a
smoking-designated break room won a small victory from the same legislative
committee.
A bill introduced by Sen. William ``Pete'' Knight, R-Palmdale, would have
allowed bars to be designated as smoking establishments if employees
consent to work in a smoky environment, or if adequate ventilation systems
are installed to accommodate non-smoking workers.
The bill (SB 1513) was killed on an 8-8 vote, largely divided along party
lines, by the Assembly Local Government Committee. Democrats lined up on
the side of labor, which opposed the bill, while Republicans said the
free-market system should allow business owners to decide whether to allow
smoking. Only two Democrats sided with Republicans, while another Democrat
abstained from voting.
Michael Hambrick, senior vice president of the National Smokers Alliance,
an organization of 300,000 California smokers and bar owners that is
heavily financed by three tobacco companies, said the group will continue
to push for an exemption to California's stringent, 6-month-old bar smoking
ban. More than 20 tavern owners lined up in support of the bill, telling
members revenues were down more than 60 percent in some cases, prompting
layoffs of bartenders, waiters and waitresses.
The tavern owners ``are telling (lawmakers) to get out of their ivory
towers, get in the real world, put their butts on the bar stool and feel
our economic pain,'' Hambrick said.
But labor groups and medical and health associations said their surveys
show that most Californians support the smoking ban. They point to state
tax records that show revenues in small bars and restaurants actually rose
1 percent in January, the first month of the ban, compared with the same
month last year.
``What this bill does is gut the protections of (the state law) that all
employees of this state deserve: protections from being exposed to
carcinogens that cause lung cancer and heart disease,'' said Tom Rankin of
the California Labor Federation, AFL-CIO.
Knight's measure would have allowed employers to pay an annual $50 fee and
apply for a Class I smoking lounge permit from the Department of Alcoholic
Beverage Control. The permit requires all employees to consent to working
in an establishment that allows smoking. If workers don't agree, a bar
owner could pay $100 a year and apply for a Class II permit, but would also
have to install an air ventilation system approved by the State Building
Standards Commission.
With either permit, bar owners would have to post signs indicating smoking
is allowed and accommodate employees who do not want to work in smoking
sections. Employers who coerce workers into working in areas against their
will would face a maximum $7,000 fine per violation.
Knight's bill represents the fourth attempt this legislative session to try
to overturn the smoking ban in California bars, taverns and cardrooms. Two
bills that sought to exempt bars from the law for another three years died
in the Senate. The Assembly Labor and Employment Committee killed another
bill written by the labor committee chairman, Dick Floyd, D-Carson, that
would have exempted bars until the federal government adopted ventilation
standards.
On Monday, the local government committee approved a bill by Senate
Republican Leader Ross Johnson of Irvine that would give employees in bars,
taverns and cardrooms a chance to light up on their breaks without having
to step outside. Under the California Smoke-Free Workplace Act of 1994,
employers may designate break rooms for smoking if proper exhaust systems
are in place, and if employees are not required to work in or walk through
the smoking area while performing their tasks.
Labor groups said Johnson's bill was unnecessary, but supporters said there
was confusion over whether the law covered drinking establishments, which
were exempted from the original smoking ban until Jan. 1.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Push For Medical Use Of Pot In Jeopardy ('The Las Vegas Sun'
Says Nevadans For Medical Rights Appear To Be A Few Hundred Signatures Shy
In Nye County - The Verification Process Must Be Completed By July 7)
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 17:51:02 -0700
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US NV: Push For Medical Use of Pot in Jeopardy
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Source: Las Vegas Sun (NV)
Contact: letters@lasvegassun.com
Website: http://www.lasvegassun.com/
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Author: Cy Ryan - Sun Capitol Bureau
PUSH FOR MEDICAL USE OF POT IN JEOPARDY
CARSON CITY -- The future of an initiative petition to allow the use of
marijuana for medical purposes is in doubt.
The initiative appears to have failed to qualify because of deficiencies in
the number of signatures in Nye County. Secretary of State Dean Heller,
however, said the issue of whether there were enough signers on the Nye
County petitions must still be sorted out.
Nye County Clerk Arte Robb, whose office sampled 1,228 signatures to see if
they were registered voters, said Monday 607 of them were valid. The
requirement for Nye County is 926 voters.
Robb said the more than 600 signatures were found to be ineligible for a
number of reasons such as the signers were not registered voters,
signatures were illegible and the persons circulating the petition were not
registered voters.
Heller said he understands that Robb disqualified a number of petitions
because the individuals circulating them were not registered voters or
lived in another county. He said, however, that Robb does not have the
authority to knock out all the signatures on those petitions and there may
be several hundred that were found not to be eligible by Robb.
Only a judge can rule that these signatures are invalid, Heller said. He
said he may have to order a recount in Nye County.
As a sidelight, Robb said that two women who were carrying additional
petitions to the clerk's office in Tonopah were stopped in Esmeralda County
by law enforcement officers and missed the 5 p.m. deadline June 16 for
filing. Because they were late, they were not allowed to file the petitions
which Robb said amounted to only an additional 90 signatures.
Nevada law requires 46,764 signatures of registered voters statewide to
place an initiative on the November ballot. And while the marijuana group
exceeded that by collecting 74,466 signatures, the law also requires that
10 percent of the voters must sign in 13 of the 17 counties.
Backers of the medical marijuana initiative collected signatures in 13 of
the 17 counties, the bare minimum. Therefore, if they fail to qualify in
one county, the whole petition is lost.
The proposed constitutional amendment would allow a patient, upon the
advice of his physician to use marijuana for the treatment or alleviation
of cancer, glaucoma, AIDS, persistent nausea, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis
and "other disorders characterized by muscular spasticity; or other
conditions approved pursuant to law for such treatment."
Dan Hart, the group's spokesman, declined comment Monday saying he wanted
to study the figures before making a statement.
As county clerks continue to verify petition signatures, five counties --
Clark, Humboldt, Lander, Lyon and Pershing -- already have reported they
have received the required number of valid signatures to place the issue on
the November ballot.
The clerks must complete the verification process by July 7.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Prison Disturbance Creates A Wake-Up Call (A Staff Editorial
In The Madison, Wisconsin, 'Capital Times' Suggests A Protest Sunday Night
By Hundreds Of Inmates At Fox Lake Correctional Institution
Was In Response To The Latest Moves By The State Department
Of Corrections To Transfer More Wisconsin Prisoners Out Of State)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 23:39:43 -0400
To: DrugSense News Service
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US WI: Editorial: Prison Disturbance Creates A Wake-Up Call
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: June 30, 1998
Source: The Capital Times (Madison, WI)
Contact: tctvoice@madison.com
Website: http://www.madison.com/
Section: Editorial
PRISON DISTURBANCE CREATES A WAKE-UP CALL
The troubles at the Fox Lake Correctional Institution in recent days should
come as no surprise to anyone who has followed recent developments in
Wisconsin correctional policy. The latest moves by the state Department of
Corrections to transfer Wisconsin inmates out of state represent the worst
sort of stop-gap policy-making and it is no wonder that the prisoners whose
lives will be most affected by those moves would react negatively.
This may not justify the decision Sunday night of several hundred angry
prisoners at Fox Lake to refuse to report for an evening head count. But it
does explain their action.
As many as 300 inmates joined in the protest against the state's expanding
use of transfers. As crowding in Wisconsin prisons has reached a critical
stage, the transfers have become an integral part of state corrections policy.
But they are not good policy.
The transfer scheme has already placed roughly 1,400 inmates in jails in
Oklahoma, Tennessee and Texas, and those numbers are slated to increase
dramatically in the months ahead. Wisconsin officials acknowledge that
there is widespread anxiety among prisoners regarding the transfers, and
for good reason.
The moves place Wisconsin inmates in jails in states that are notorious for
their substandard conditions and their lack of adequate rehabilitation
programs. They also place inmates far from families and friends whose
support is vital to ensuring they can successfully return to their
communities.
Worst of all, the transfers appear to have taken on a political character.
Among the Fox Lake inmates slated for transfer to Tennessee soon is Adrian
Lomax, who has exposed a number of flaws in the state corrections system.
Wisconsinites need not sympathize with Lomax or other inmates to recognize
that the transfer policy is wrong-minded. If pursued, it will cost
taxpayers dearly in the form of failed rehabilitation, an increase in
repeat offenses, expensive lawsuits and, as Sunday's developments
illustrated, tensions within the prison
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Defense Begins Case, Calls On 'Dateline NBC' Associate Producer
('The Bangor Daily News' Peers A Light Into The Murky Reliability
Of Urine Testing In An Update On The Lawsuit Brought By Truck Driver
Peter Kennedy Against The National Broadcasting Corporation,
Which Announced In 1995 That Kennedy Was Fired As A Result
Of Two Positive Drug Tests)
Date: Sat, 04 Jul 1998 23:32:39 -0400
To: DrugSense News Service (mapnews@mapinc.org)
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US ME: Defense Begins Case, Calls
On 'Dateline NBC' Associate Producer
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: compassion23@geocities.com (Frank S. World)
Pubdate: Tuesday, June 30, 1998
Source: The Bangor Daily News
Contact: bdnmail@bangornews.infi.net
Website: http://www.bangornews.com/
Author: Nancy Garland of the NEWS Staff
DEFENSE BEGINS CASE, CALLS ON 'DATELINE NBC' ASSOCIATE PRODUCER
BANGOR - The laboratory that analyzed the first urine sample given by
trucker Peter Kennedy in September 1994 lost its certification about six
months later and eventually closed, according to testimony presented Monday
in a controversial defamation trial taking place in Bangor federal court.
The Acculab facility in Wisconsin was decertified by the National Institute
of Drug Administration because, among other factors, it was producing too
many false-positive results on random drug tests, according to a
toxicologist who testified during the eighth day of the trial.
The reporting of the drug test by "Dateline NBC" is a crucial element in
the suit brought by Kennedy, his boss, Ray Veilleux, and Veilleux's wife,
Kelly, against the National Broadcasting Co., correspondent Fred Francis
and independent producer Alan Handel for defamation, invasion of privacy
and negligent infliction of emotional distress.
The shows, which aired April 19, 1995, and April 26, 1995, prominently
featured Kennedy in a cross-country trucking trip, violating federal
regulations along the way.
A report from Acculab concluded that Kennedy's urine tested positive for
the presence of marijuana, amphetamine and methamphetamine. The test
results were taken from a random drug test ordered while Kennedy was on the
cross-country trucking trip - with "Dateline NBC" staff in tow.
Questions about the accuracy of the drug test and the laboratory that
performed it were disclosed during the final phase of the plaintiff's case
presented Monday.
The defense launched its case in the late morning, calling a "Dateline NBC"
associate producer and a trucking executive to the stand. The trial is
expected to last into next week.
In the broadcast, it was announced that Kennedy was fired as a result of
two positive drug tests.
Toxicologist Brian Pape of New Hampshire said that the drug test results on
Kennedy's urine were not reliable.
In addition to problems with the first laboratory, another laboratory, this
one in California, used the same sample to perform a second test on
Kennedy's urine. The second test registered positive for the same drugs as
the first test, but Pape said the sample could have been contaminated by
the time it reached the California laboratory.
It was Kennedy who requested the second drug test in 1994. He admitted to
using marijuana a few days before a cross-country trip in September and
October of that year but denied using amphetamines.
A lab director at the second laboratory testified by deposition that
Kennedy's urine sample was not frozen when it was sent there from
Wisconsin. A frozen urine specimen "preserves the integrity of the sample"
and "retards the breakdown" of any drugs in the sample, according to James
Callies of Quest Diagnostics. Callies is director of the substance abuse
testing laboratory at the firm called Attest.
Even though the urine sample was not frozen, it tested positive for
marijuana, methamphetamine and amphetamine, acording to Callies.
Any driver who tests positive for drugs is automatically fired, according
to the president and chief executive officer of a Florida firm that had
umbrella responsibility for Kennedy and his boss at the time of the drug test.
Testifying for the defense, Carroll Fulmer of the Carroll Fulmer Group said
he issued the order to fire Kennedy.
Fulmer testified that his company bought out Ray Veilleux's company in
1992. At the time, Veilleux's company was called Transcoastal Corp. Fulmer
said the company exhibited financial problems from the start. Veilleux also
appeared to have problems doing business the way Fulmer officials wanted it
done, leading to a separation of the businesses in 1994.
Fulmer severed ties completely with Veilleux in 1995 but he denied the
separation was because of the "Dateline NBC" broadcast.
He said Veilleux called him after the broadcast and announced he was suing
NBC. He sought Fulmer's support, the executive said.
"He thought our breakdown of the company was the result of the show. I said
'it definitely was not,"' Fulmer testified.
In other testimony Monday, an associate producer of "Dateline NBC"
testified she was "in shock" to hear Ray Veilleux claim last week that she
referred to a trucker-employee of his as a "[expletive] dopehead."
Tracey Vail of Washington, D.C.. said she never referred to Kennedy that way.
The first witness for the defense, Vail said she first heard the
expletive-laden description of Kennedy last Friday in court.
"I shook my head. I was in shock," said Vail, recalling her reaction to the
testimony of Ray Veilleux.
Vail's version of events before, during and after the filming of the
"Dateline NBC" trucking series got under way after a midmorning break.
Before her testimony, plaintiff's attorney Bill Robitzek rested his case.
U.S. District Judge Morton Brody reserved a decision on a motion to dismiss
the case.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Group Sues Writer For Sham Article ('The Associated Press'
Says The Police Group DARE - Drug Abuse Resistance Education -
Filed A $10 Million Libel Suit Monday In Los Angeles Federal Court
Against Fired Journalist Stephen Glass For His Article In 'The New Republic')
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 23:53:14 -0400
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Subject: MN: US: WIRE: GROUP SUES WRITER FOR SHAM ARTICLE
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: GDaurer@aol.com
XSource: (AP)
Pubdate: Tue, 30 Jun 1998
Group Sues Writer For Sham Article
LOS ANGELES (AP) - The national police anti-drug group D.A.R.E. is suing a
former staff writer at The New Republic who admitted making up material in
his articles, including at least one about D.A.R.E.
In a $10 million libel suit filed Monday in Los Angeles federal court, the
group Drug Abuse Resistance Education charges that Stephen Glass took
``free license to invent facts, people and scenarios, falsely describing
them in detail'' in two articles he wrote about D.A.R.E.
``D.A.R.E. was one victim of many,'' the suit said, according to today's
Los Angeles Times. ``There is absolutely no truth to Glass' statements
regarding D.A.R.E. and Glass has admitted as such.''
Editors at The New Republic apologized earlier this month to readers after
finding that Glass, 25, fabricated all or part of 27 of the 41 articles he
wrote for the publication.
It wasn't clear how much of the D.A.R.E. stories were made up. One, in The
New Republic, accused D.A.R.E. of covering up the program's problems and
intimidating people into not exposing them.
The New Republic said some D.A.R.E. critics were pressured to soften their
opinions, as Glass had written, but it acknowledged that Glass made up at
least four people, the suit said.
The other D.A.R.E. piece by Glass was a free-lance assignment for Rolling
Stone. The lawsuit does not name The New Republic or Rolling Stone as
defendants.
Glass was fired last month after confessing he made up a story about
computer hackers. The confession prompted a monthlong investigation by The
New Republic. Glass cooperated with the investigation and apologized in
letters to Charles Lane, the magazine's editor, and Martin Peretz, the
owner and editor in chief.
***
[Portland NORML notes - Stephen Glass's article in 'The New Republic,'
titled, "Don't You D.A.R.E.," which appeared in the issue of March 3, 1997,
is one of many articles about DARE included at this site. Rather than censor
the article by removing it, Portland NORML has added a note about its
inaccuracies but will continue to archive it for historical purposes at
http://www.pdxnorml.org/NR_DARE_030397.html - ed.]
***
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 20:34:15 EDT
Errors-To: manager@drcnet.org
Reply-To: amr@lainet.com
Originator: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: drctalk@drcnet.org
From: Dave Fratello (amr@lainet.com)
To: Multiple recipients of list (drctalk@drcnet.org)
Subject: The Dope on Glass's DARE Articles
Back when the Stephen Glass/New Republic scandal broke in May, many folks
wondered how the alleged fabrications might affect Glass's articles on the
D.A.R.E. program. (Glass wrote about DARE for The New Republic and Rolling
Stone.) Like many of Glass's articles, it appears now that these DARE
stories were based on a real phenomenon, but characters were created from
thin air to make or prove key points that were otherwise difficult or
impossible to nail down.
DARE filed a lawsuit against Glass for defamation ($10 million, no less).
Below is a triumphal series of announcements about Glass's fall from grace,
and the lawsuit. All info courtesy of DARE's website...
http://www.dare-america.org
-- dave fratello
***
MAGAZINE WRITER FIRED
STEPHEN GLASS WROTE NEGATIVE, SLANTED AND FALSE INFORMATION ABOUT D.A.R.E.
On May 11, 1998, the Washington Post reported that The New Republic magazine
fired associate editor, Stephen Glass, "for fabricating characters and
situations in several of his articles." According to the Washington Post,
The New Republic editor Charles Lane said, "he dismissed Glass after
confirming that Glass had written a recent article, which was a total
fabrication." Lane called this latest piece by Glass, "a hoax." Lane told the
Washington Post, "that he determined to a moral certainty that the entire
article was made up." When confronted by editor Lane, "Glass also
acknowledged problems or embellishments in some of his earlier articles."
It should be noted that Stephen Glass made false, malicious and wild
unsubstantiated accusations concerning the D.A.R.E. program in two major
magazines. Some reporters who failed to confirm facts and examine sources
have repeated information from these articles.
UPDATE: June 30, 1998
In the June 29, 1998, issue of The New Republic is a full accounting of the
investigation into the articles written by Stephen Glass. Concerning the
article on the D.A.R.E. program, Glass "fabricated some of the persons who
purportedly had negative experiences with D.A.R.E." These included "James,
a television news producer" and "Daniel, a young protestor at an Illinois
college." Also nonexistent were an "NBC employee" and a "Justice Department
official." The New Republic gave no excuses; however, they did offer their
"deepest apologies to all concerned."
UPDATE: July 1, 1998
D.A.R.E. FILES LIBEL SUIT AGAINST MAGAZINE JOURNALIST
Los Angeles, CA (June 30, 1998) - D.A.R.E. (Drug Abuse Resistance Education),
filed a $10 million libel suit against journalist Stephen Glass, who is
accused of falsifying over two dozen articles in various magazines. In the
lawsuit, D.A.R.E. claims its reputation was maligned by articles that Glass
wrote for New Republic and Rolling Stone, which D.A.R.E. charges "aided,
abetted and assisted" in these fabrications "for sensationalism and to sell
copy."
In 1997 the New Republic ran a piece written by Glass entitled "Don't You
D.A.R.E." which claimed the organization encouraged kids to turn in their
parents for suspected drug use. The article included a reference to a
ten-year-old boy who supposedly was pressured by officials at the D.A.R.E.
chapter in Douglasville, Georgia - a city where, the lawsuit charged, there
was no D.A.R.E. program.
Similarly, in a 1998 article for Rolling Stone, entitled "Truth or D.A.R.E.,"
Glass accused D.A.R.E. of trying to "silence critics, suppress scientific
research and punish nonbelievers." According to the article, D.A.R.E.
officials accused an Illinois college professor critical of the organization
as a campus drug dealer. The lawsuit maintained that the named professor
"is an entirely fictitious character."
"Glass had taken free license to invent facts, people and scenarios, falsely
describing them in detail, " according to the suit. "D.A.R.E. was one victim
of many. There is absolutely no truth to Glass' statements regarding D.A.R.E.
and Glass has admitted as much."
When the scandal first broke in May, 1998, New Republic fired Glass and
discovered in a review of his work that 27 of his 41 articles for the
publication were entirely or partially made up. The lawsuit is the first
libel action filed against Glass since his fabrications first came to light.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DARE Funding To Continue Despite Proven Ineffectiveness -
Clinton Administration Continues To Ignore The Science, DPF Charges
(News Release From The Drug Policy Foundation)
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 15:32:21 EDT
Reply-To: dpnews@dpf.org
From: Drug Policy News Service (dpf-mod@dpf.org)
To: Multiple recipients of list (dpnews@dpf.org)
Subject: Press Release: DPF Denounces Continued DARE Funding
DRUG POLICY FOUNDATION NEWS RELEASE
Contact: Rob Stewart, Scott Ehlers, or Alexander Robinson
(202) 537-5005
For Release: June 30, 1998
DARE Funding to Continue Despite Proven Ineffectiveness
Clinton Administration Continues to Ignore the Science, DPF Charges
WASHINGTON, D.C. - On July 1, the new Department of Education "Principles
of Effectiveness" for drug prevention programs will go into effect. The
Drug Abuse Resistance Education (DARE) program will be eligible for
federal funding, according to Bill Modzeleski, director of the Safe and
Drug-Free Schools Program. The Drug Policy Foundation disagrees with that
decision because research has consistently shown DARE to be ineffective in
reducing drug use.
"Science should dictate our nation's drug policies and how we spend our
limited prevention resources. If the scientific community says, 'DARE
doesn't work,' then its federal subsidy should end on July 1," said H.
Alexander Robinson, DPF's public policy director.
The new "Principles of Effectiveness" will require Safe and Drug-Free
School grants "to support research-based drug and violence prevention
programs for youth," according to the June 1 Federal Register.
"What is the point in creating 'Principles of Effectiveness' for federal
drug prevention grants if the government continues to fund ineffective
programs?" asked Rob Stewart, DPF's communications director. "We must do
all we can to identify sound programs that prevent adolescent drug use and
reduce the harms associated with drugs," Stewart said.
The most recent study showing DARE's ineffectiveness was conducted by
Dennis P. Rosenbaum, Ph.D., a professor at the University of Illinois at
Chicago. His six-year study of 1,798 students found that "DARE had no
long-term effects on a wide range of drug use measures." Prof. Rosenbaum
told NBC News: "Kids in the suburbs who Š participated in DARE actually had
significantly higher levels of drug use than suburban kids who did not get
the DARE program."
The National Institute on Drug Abuse does not endorse DARE either. In its
March 1997 publication, "Preventing Drug Use Among Children and
Adolescents: A Research-Based Guide," NIDA recommended 10 programs
shown to be effective in reducing drug use. DARE was not mentioned.
"If the National Institute on Drug Abuse doesn't trust DARE, neither should
the American people," Robinson noted.
But according to Modzeleski, DARE can continue receiving federal funding
because the new "Principles of Effectiveness" only require programs to
demonstrate a "promise of effectiveness."
But published research indicates that DARE cannot fulfill this promise. In
addition to Rosenbaum's study, articles published in such prestigious
journals as American Journal of Public Health and Preventive Medicine have
found fault with DARE's methods. "If programs that receive a failing grade
are still eligible for funding, the 'Principles of Effectiveness' simply
represent lip service to science, which has typified the Clinton
administration's approach to drug policy," Stewart concluded.
***
Contact Information:
Bill Modzeleski
Safe and Drug Free Schools Program
U.S. Department of Education
tel: (202) 260-3954
email: bill_modzeleski@ed.gov
Prof. Dennis Rosenbaum
Department of Criminal Justice
University of Illinois, Chicago
tel: (312) 996-5290
Established in 1986, the Drug Policy Foundation is a private nonprofit with
over 18,000 supporters who favor a range of reasoned and compassionate
alternatives to current policies.
***
This press release was brought to you by the Drug Policy News Service, a
service of the Drug Policy Foundation. To sign up for the Drug Policy News
Service, send email to listproc@dpf.org with the following in the message:
subscribe dpnews (Firstname Lastname).
[Replace "(" with "<" and ")" with ">" - ed.]
***
THE DRUG POLICY FOUNDATION
"Creating reasoned and compassionate drug policies"
4455 Connecticut Ave., NW
Suite B-500
Washington, DC 20008-2328 USA
Tel: (202) 537-5005 * Fax: (202) 537-3007
dpf@dpf.org
http://www.dpf.org
http://www.drugpolicy.org
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for June 25-July 1