-------------------------------------------------------------------
Man found guilty of killing his mother now faces death penalty
(The Associated Press says a jury in Portland, Oregon, convicted
Harrison Lee Bletson of aggravated murder Thursday. Witnesses said Bletson
went on a crack cocaine binge the day before his mother was killed,
but the possibility that he was a sociopath before using crack
isn't mentioned.)
From: "Bob Owen@W.H.E.N." (when@olywa.net)
To: "_Drug Policy --" (when@hemp.net)
Subject: Man convicted of killing mother during crack binge
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 14:12:06 -0800
Sender: owner-when@hemp.net
Man found guilty of killing his mother now faces death penalty
The Associated Press
12/12/98 3:39 AM Eastern
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) -- A man faces a possible death sentence after he was
convicted of stabbing his mother to death with a butcher knife during a
crack cocaine binge.
A jury on Thursday convicted Harrison Lee Bletson, 41, of aggravated murder
for killing Dannella Bletson, 62, on April 14.
Prosecutors called the conviction a day of reckoning for Bletson, who they
say had abused the love of his family for years.
"There comes a point when their love for him can't protect him, and Mr.
Bletson has to pay consequences for his actions," Stacy Heyworth, a senior
deputy district attorney, said during closing arguments.
The jury reached its unanimous verdict after two days of deliberations. Two
jurors cried after the verdict was read, and Bletson covered his mouth with
his hand, bowed his head and closed his eyes.
Prosecutors showed jurors more than 20 pieces of evidence during the
seven-day trial, from a boot print on a shattered bedroom door to blood
spatters on Bletson's pants that matched his mother's blood.
Witnesses said Bletson went on a crack cocaine binge the day before his
mother was killed. He ran out of belongings to trade for drugs after he used
a cashmere coat his mother had given him as collateral for crack.
When he tried to go home April 14, his mother had locked the deadbolt. So
Bletson talked a telephone repairman into lending him a ladder to climb
through his second-floor window, witnesses testified.
Prosecutors theorized that Bletson demanded money from his mother and when
she wouldn't give it to him, hit her on the head with a cast-iron skillet,
shattering the skillet. He then stabbed her with a butcher knife 17 times,
cutting himself on the hand.
Prosecutors said Bletson went back to the house at least twice to steal his
mother's bracelets and leather coat.
"This has to make your stomach turn," Heyworth told jurors. "He walks right
past his dead mother. How does he do that? How much does he love his
mother?"
The penalty phase will begin Monday and last about two days, said Multnomah
County Circuit Judge Frank Bearden.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jury convicts Portland man of felony murder at illegal club
(The Oregonian says Edwin Lasaun Williams faces a minimum of 25 years
in prison for a gunfight at an after-hours drinking and gambling club
in Northeast Portland.)
The Oregonian
letters to editor:
letters@news.oregonian.com
1320 SW Broadway
Portland, OR 97201
Fax: 503-294-4193
Web: http://www.oregonlive.com/
Jury convicts Portland man of felony murder at illegal club
* Edwin Lasaun Williams faces a minimum of 25 years in prison for a gunfight
at an after-hours drinking and gambling club in Northeast
Saturday, December 12 1998
By David R. Anderson
of The Oregonian staff
A jury convicted a Northeast Portland man Friday of felony murder for
killing a man during a gunfight inside an illegal after-hours drinking and
gambling club.
However, the Multnomah County jury did not convict Edwin Lasaun Williams,
21, of the more serious charges of aggravated murder or murder, deciding
that Williams did not intend to kill Stacy Sabb, 28. Instead, the jury
decided that Williams caused the death of Sabb during a felony burglary.
Williams cried and said, "Oh my God," repeatedly after Circuit Judge Robert
Redding announced the jury's verdict. Williams also was convicted of three
counts of first-degree burglary. The felony murder conviction carries a
mandatory life sentence with a minimum of 25 years in prison. He is
scheduled to be sentenced Jan. 11.
Sabb, who ran the club in a house at 4048 N.E. Mallory Ave., died early Dec.
20, 1997, in a gunfight with Williams. Williams fired a .45-caliber
semiautomatic pistol five times at Sabb, prosecutors said. Sabb was hit
twice -- in the thigh and the abdomen -- and died of internal bleeding. Sabb
fired his gun three times, hitting Williams once in the abdomen.
Prosecutors said Williams initially had gone into the club and used his gun
to threaten a man who had fathered a child by his girlfriend.
Sabb, who also was the club's bouncer, apparently tried to get Williams to
leave, but Williams became angry that Sabb was allowed to have a gun in the
club and he was not, prosecutors said. It was a case of a minor dispute that
escalated out of control, they said.
"He just kept digging himself deeper and deeper and deeper," Charles French,
a Multnomah County deputy district attorney, told the jury.
Williams was convicted of burglary for illegally trespassing in the house
with the intention of using a deadly weapon.
Williams' attorneys argued that he fired in self-defense and referred to the
club as a "war zone." They portrayed Sabb as the aggressor, a three-time
convicted felon who ran the club and felt he had been disrespected by Williams.
But prosecutors disagreed.
"We have laws here in Oregon," French told the jury. "This isn't war, it's
our community."
The two sides argued about the interpretation of bullet trajectories and
shell casings at the scene. Prosecutors said they showed that Williams fired
first, when he was in the living room, and continued as he walked toward the
front door. However, the defense argued it was just as probable that Sabb
fired first.
Defense attorney Scott Asphaug also attacked the credibility of the state's
witnesses, calling five of them liars. Williams gave police and hospital
staff seven conflicting versions of what happened, his attorneys told the jury.
At first, Williams denied he had fired any shots, but stepped between two
armed men to break up a fight. He said a friend known to him as "Little Rat"
had been cheated at dice and wanted revenge. Williams later said he covered
his eyes and fired at Sabb in self defense and was shot in the back. But
doctors said he was shot in the abdomen, with the bullet exiting his back.
Asphaug said Williams was under the influence of alcohol, cocaine and,
later, pain medications, which affected his ability to remember what had
happened.
"This man is not a saint," Asphaug told the jury. "However, this man is not
a murderer."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Australian Study Finds Marijuana Not a Significant Driving Hazard -
Evidence Contradicts Drug Czar McCaffrey, Impugns Rationale
for Drug Testing (A press release from California NORML provides more details
about "The Prevalence and Role of Alcohol, Cannabinoids, Benzodiazepines
and Stimulants in Non-Fatal Crashes," a study published in May of this year
by researchers at the Department of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology
at the University of Adelaide, the largest and latest research to contradict
claims by U.S. drug warriors, led by Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey,
that marijuana is a major road safety hazard.)
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 20:28:47 -0800
To: dpfca@drugsense.org, aro@drugsense.org
From: canorml@igc.apc.org (Dale Gieringer)
Subject: DPFCA: Australian Study on Marijuana & Driving
Sender: owner-dpfca@drugsense.org
Reply-To: dpfca@drugsense.org
Organization: DrugSense http://www.drugsense.org/dpfca/
-- Cal. NORML PRESS RELEASE: Dec. 12, 1998 --
Australian Study Finds Marijuana Not a Significant Driving Hazard
Evidence Contradicts Drug Czar McCaffrey, Impugns Rationale for Drug Testing
A South Australian study of 2,500 injured drivers has failed to
find evidence that marijuana is a significant causal factor in traffic
accidents. The study, published in May, 1998 by researchers at the
Department of Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology at the University of
Adelaide, is the largest and latest in a series of studies contradicting
claims by U.S. drug warriors, led by Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey, that
marijuana is a major road safety hazard.
The researchers examined blood samples from drivers in non-fatal
accidents for traces of alcohol, cannabinoids (marijuana), benzodiazepines
(tranquilizers), and amphetamines. Overall, 12.4% of drivers tested
positive for alcohol; 10.8% for marijuana; 2.6% for benzodiazepines, and
1.3% for amphetamines. Marijuana plus alcohol were found in 3.0% of the
drivers, while other drug combinations were found in 1.3%; alcohol alone
was present in 8.6%, and marijuana alone in 7.1%.
The researchers then assessed the drivers' degree of culpability
for the crashes. Overall, they found no increase in culpability for
drivers showing cannabinoids alone compared to drug-free drivers. In
contrast, there was a very strong relation between alcohol blood levels and
accident culpability. The combination of marijuana with alcohol also
showed strongly increased accident culpability. Benzodiazepines at typical
therapeutic levels were found to significantly increase culpability, while
amphetamines were not.
The researchers found some suggestion that drivers with low levels
of cannabinoids alone actually had reduced accident culpability, while
drivers with higher levels had somewhat increased culpability, although
there were insufficient data to confirm this.
The authors noted that other driving studies have found that
marijuana by itself may be associated with reduced accident risks, while
the combination of alcohol and marijuana is clearly dangerous. In the
largest U.S. study to date, a survey by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) of 1,882 drivers killed in fatal accidents,
researchers found that marijuana-only drivers were if anything less
culpable for accidents than drug-free drivers, and that "there was no
indication that marijuana by itself was a cause of fatal accidents."
Such results refute claims by Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey that
"marijuana is now the second-leading cause of car crashes among young
people" (USA Today, Oct. 30, 1998). McCaffrey's office claims that the
source of his information was NHTSA, but the agency's spokesmen say that
their evidence shows only that marijuana is the second-most used drug on
the road, not that it is a common cause of crashes.
California NORML hailed the South Australian study as yet further
evidence that random drug testing of transportation workers is unjustified.
Under Department of Transportation guidelines, workers are disqualified
for having trace amounts of marijuana, cocaine, opiates or amphetamines in
their urine. Marijuana stays in urine for several days, significantly
longer than in the bloodstream, where it is detectable for only 2-3 hours
in occasional users or 24 hours in chronic users. Thus drug tests are
highly over-sensitive to marijuana, which has never been proven to be a
significant road safety hazard, but highly tolerant of legal drugs that are
known to present greater safety risks, such as alcohol and benzodiazepines.
The South Australian study is titled, "The Prevalence and Role of
Alcohol, Cannabinoids, Benzodiazepines and Stimulants in Non-Fatal
Crashes," by C.E. Hunter, R.J. Lokan, M.C. Longo, J.M White and M.A. White.
It is available from: Forensic Science, Department for Administrative
and Information Services, 21 Divett Place, Adelaide, South Australia 5000;
phone 08-8226-7700; FAX 08:8226:7777; E-mail: admin@forensic.sa.gov.au.
***
Dale Gieringer (415) 563-5858 // canorml@igc.apc.org
2215-R Market St. #278, San Francisco CA 94114
-------------------------------------------------------------------
2nd Officer Placed on Paid Leave in Shakedown Probe (The Dallas Morning News
says another Dallas police officer, Quentis R. Roper, a former local football
standout, is suspected of stealing thousands of dollars from drug dealers
and undocumented Mexican immigrants and has been placed on paid leave
pending the outcome of a criminal investigation. The investigation into
the alleged shakedowns became public Sunday night
when Officer Daniel E. Maples Jr. turned himself in because he feared
drug dealers would hurt his loved ones.)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 10:54:43 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US TX: 2nd Officer Placed on Paid Leave in Shakedown Probe
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: adbryan@onramp.net
Pubdate: Sat, 12 Dec 1998
Source: Dallas Morning News (TX)
Contact: letterstoeditor@dallasnews.com
Website: http://www.dallasnews.com/
Copyright: 1998 The Dallas Morning News
Author: Jason Sickles / The Dallas Morning News
2ND OFFICER PLACED ON PAID LEAVE IN SHAKEDOWN PROBE
Lawyer says drug dealers alleging money was taken aren't credible
A second Dallas police officer suspected of stealing thousands of dollars
from drug dealers and undocumented Mexican immigrants has been placed on
paid leave pending the outcome of a criminal investigation, a Police
Department source said Friday.
Officer Quentis R. Roper, 32, a former local football standout, has not
been arrested or charged with a crime. The source, who asked not to be
identified, declined to say why Officer Roper is a suspect.
Officer Roper, a seven-year veteran, could not be reached for comment. Bob
Baskett, his attorney, said Officer Roper has done nothing wrong.
"It is a drug dealer who claims he has taken some money," Mr. Baskett said.
"He's not a credible witness. He's a drug dealer."
A police investigation into the alleged thefts became public Sunday night
when Officer Daniel E. Maples Jr., 26, surrendered at Grand Prairie police
headquarters. Detective John Brimmer, a Grand Prairie police spokesman,
said the officer said he was turning himself in because he feared drug
dealers with whom he'd had contact in the past would hurt his loved ones.
"The drug dealers had allegedly threatened him that if he didn't give back
their money, they'd hurt his girlfriend and baby," Detective Brimmer said.
It is unknown why Officer Maples, a Dallas officer since 1995, turned
himself in to Grand Prairie police. That department has not been involved
in the investigation.
"He voluntarily stayed here until the [Dallas police] public integrity unit
arrived," Detective Brimmer said.
Dallas investigators did not arrest Officer Maples but did take away his
badge and gun while in the Grand Prairie police station, he said. The
officer has been placed on paid administrative leave, sources said.
Officer Maples and his attorneys have declined to comment on the
investigation.
Police officials also continued to decline to discuss specifics of the case.
"Any time information is developed or comes to the attention of the
department in which it appears an employee is involved in criminal conduct,
we owe it to every man and woman of the Dallas Police Department and the
citizens of Dallas to fully and thoroughly investigate the allegations,"
Executive Assistant Chief Willard Rollins said. "We will not tolerate this
type of behavior."
The two officers are the only police employees believed to have been placed
on leave because of the investigation. A source said it may take several
more weeks before the inquiry ends.
Police sources said detectives learned of the alleged theft about a year
ago, when several of the victims complained that the officers had taken
money from them.
Sources have said the scheme targeted Mexican citizens who may have feared
deportation if they reported the thefts.
Others are believed to be drug dealers who said the officers would arrest
them at apartments and motels, confiscate whatever money they had on hand
and keep it.
One source estimated the officers have taken in $10,000 to $12,000, but a
second source said the amounts could be much higher.
Officers Roper and Maples both work nights and patrol northeast Dallas. As
many as 15 of their colleagues have been questioned in recent months by
investigators, a source said.
Department records show that neither officer has ever been disciplined for
serious administrative violations. Officer Maples has received seven
commendations, and Officer Roper has been given 48.
Senior Cpl. Glenn White, president of the Dallas Police Association, said
it is hard for him to believe that Officer Roper is guilty.
"He is the epitome of a beat officer," Cpl. White said. "He takes an active
role in the community on-duty and off-duty."
Officer Roper was a star quarterback for Pinkston High School in West
Dallas in the late '80s. He went on to play at Rice University and for the
Dallas Texans arena football team.
"He said to hell with an athletic career and decided to be a policeman,"
Cpl. White said. "He's the kind of guy you would let your sister date."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Tobacco Case Lawyers Awarded Billions In Fees (The Associated Press version
in the New Bedford, Massachusetts, Standard-Times)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 14:07:57 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US TX: Tobacco Case Lawyers Awarded Billions In Fees
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: John Smith
Pubdate: Saturday, 12 December 1998
Source: Standard-Times (MA)
Contact: YourView@S-T.com
Website: http://www.s-t.com/
Copyright: 1998 The Standard-Times
Author: Katie Fairbank, Associated Press writer
TOBACCO CASE LAWYERS AWARDED BILLIONS IN FEES
DALLAS -- Attorneys who helped Texas, Mississippi and Florida settle
their lawsuits against the tobacco industry will receive almost $8.2
billion in fees, an amount believed to be the largest ever awarded in
the United States.
A divided three-member arbitration panel announced yesterday that five
private attorneys in Texas will receive $3.3 billion. The 11-firm team
that worked on the Florida case was awarded $3.43 billion, and the 13
Mississippi team was awarded $1.43 billion.
The lawyers will receive the payments over at least 10 years, but
perhaps as long as 25 years.
The payments, decided by a national arbitration panel in Washington,
are about 19 percent of the record $17.3 billion settlement in Texas,
about 25 percent of the $13 billion settlement reached in Florida and
about 35 percent of the $4 billion reached in Mississippi.
The states had all reached settlements from their lawsuits against
tobacco companies for health care costs for smokers.
John Calhoun Wells, chairman of the arbitration panel, said the board
recognized the awards are "very substantial."
But Wells said that without the lawyers "there would be no
multibillion dollar settlements for the states to reimburse
tobacco-related health expenses and provide funds for educational
efforts to reduce youth smoking."
Charles B. Renfrew, the arbitrator appointed by the tobacco industry,
dissented from the opinion. He called the awards "excessive and
incomprehensible."
"I am concerned that the sheer size of the fees awarded will raise
questions as to the integrity of the proceedings here and undermine
public confidence in the profession and in the legal system
generally," he wrote.
He said while the attorneys achieved "truly incredible" results for
the states, "there are limits even in these cases as to the amount the
attorneys should be paid."
Lawyers who worked on the cases were pleased, but state officials and
at least one tobacco company criticized the size of the award.
"It sounds fair to me," said Pensacola, Fla., attorney Robert
Kerrigan, who will get a 6 percent share of the Florida award, or more
than $200 million.
Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp. said the awards are
"obscene."
"When we reached a settlement with each of these three states, we
agreed to pay 'reasonable compensation' to the lawyers representing
the states. The award of $8.1 billion defies anyone's definition of
'reasonable,"' the company said.
Texas Gov. George W. Bush also was unhappy.
"I will never understand and never agree that five private law firms
should collect more than $3.3 billion for working less than two years
on a case that was settled before it went to trial," Bush said. "The
fee seems totally out of proportion for the work performed."
Seth Moskowitz, a spokesman for RRJ Nabisco, said his company wasn't
commenting on the fee.
The three states and Minnesota had all reached settlements with the
tobacco companies prior to a national for $206 billion deal with the
remaining 46 states.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Was Justice Denied On The Border? (The San Antonio Express-News
says a senior FBI agent and a Texas Ranger who investigated the killing
of an 18-year-old goatherder, Esequiel Hernandez Jr., by a camouflaged Marine
leading an anti-drug patrol near Redford, Texas, contend the military
obstructed an inquiry of the death. They want a grand jury to consider
the matter for a third time.)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 13:08:28 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US TX: Was Justice Denied On The Border?
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: adbryan@onramp.net
Pubdate: Sat, 12 Dec 1998
Source: San Antonio Express-News (TX)
Contact: letters@express-news.net
Website: http://www.expressnews.com/
Copyright: 1998 San Antonio Express-News
Author: Dane Schiller
Related:
http://www.mapinc.org/DPFT/hernandez/hernandez_index.htm
WAS JUSTICE DENIED ON THE BORDER?
REDFORD -- A senior FBI agent and a Texas Ranger who investigated the
killing of a youth by a Marine leading an anti-drug patrol here contend the
military obstructed an inquiry of the death.
They want a grand jury to consider the matter for a third time.
The truth still isn't known about the shooting, Texas Rangers Sgt. David
Duncan said.
"The federal government came in and stifled the investigation," Duncan
said. "It's really depressing. The system we hoped would work failed at the
federal level."
He referred to the death of 18-year-old Esequiel Hernandez Jr., killed May
20, 1997, as he herded his family's goats in this village of unpaved
streets along the Rio Grande west of Big Bend National Park.
Cpl. Clemente Banuelos shot Hernandez once in the chest with his M-16 after
Hernandez fired twice through the brush and allegedly raised his
.22-caliber rifle as if to fire a third time at Banuelos's heavily
camouflaged four-man patrol.
"The Marines perceived a target-practicing shot as a threat to their
safety," said Terry Kincaid, a supervisory senior agent at the FBI's
Midland office.
He was referring to speculation that Hernandez was shooting at objects such
as tin cans.
"From that point, their training and instincts took over to neutralize a
threat," Kincaid added.
Two state grand juries didn't find sufficient evidence to return an
indictment. And a separate federal grand jury also returned no indictments
after considering whether Hernandez's civil rights were violated by the
shooting.
In August, the Navy Department, which oversees the Marine Corps, agreed
without admitting wrongdoing to pay $1.9 million to the Hernandez family to
settle a wrongful death claim against the government.
Kincaid said the incident could have been avoided if Banuelos and his team
had been better supervised and hadn't overreacted after believing they'd
come under fire.
The Texas Rangers became involved in the case because they traditionally
investigate major crimes in rural counties. The FBI investigated because
the military and Border Patrol were involved in the shooting.
Marine Maj. Gen. John Admire said the Marines responded appropriately when
they came under fire and that Hernandez's own actions led to his death.
The stance by the Rangers and the FBI came as a dispute over the shooting
was reignited by the partial release of a 13,000-page Marine Corps report
that found fault with the Marines' behavior and training but concludes the
shooting wasn't a crime.
A separate, 12,000-page report by the Justice Department on Hernandez's
death includes documents that show federal prosecutors also had questions
about the Marines' version of the shooting. Thousands of pages of that
report haven't been cleared for public release.
The Justice Department report notes federal prosecutors once considered
perjury charges against at least two of the Marines, alleging they lied to
FBI agents, but they decided they lacked evidence to file charges.
Since grand jury proceedings are secret, it's not known how much of the
information gathered by the Justice Department and the military has been
kept from state investigators, but Duncan said neither the military nor
federal prosecutors have cooperated with his probe.
Maj. Gen. John Coyne, who headed the Pentagon's investigation, said he had
"lingering suspicions" about the shooting, but no evidence proved a crime
was committed.
Coyne disputed the notion of a military cover-up and said the Texas Rangers
should do whatever their job requires.
"The report was as thorough and exhaustive as I could have made it," said
Coyne, who's retired and lives in Virginia.
He attributed the shooting to inadequate training and failures in the chain
of command.
"Basic Marine Corps training instills an aggressive spirit while teaching
combat skills," Coyne wrote in his report. "More is needed to place young
fully armed Marines in a domestic environment and perform noncombat duties."
Told about comments from Duncan and the FBI's Kincaid, Maj. Ken White, a
spokesman for the Marine Corps, said the shooting has been reviewed
thoroughly and that Coyne's report speaks for itself.
"We stand by the evaluation and hard work that went into our
investigation," White said from the Pentagon.
Presidio County District Attorney Albert Valadez said he'd need new
evidence to take the case to another state grand jury.
"I sought two indictments for murder. That speaks for itself. (The Marines)
pursued (Hernandez) and they killed him," Valadez said. "If Dave (Duncan)
or any of the Rangers finds evidence that warrants another grand jury,
we'll go round three."
Banuelos, a San Francisco native who left the military with an honorable
discharge, has said he shot Hernandez to prevent a member of the patrol
from being killed.
Jack Zimmermann, a Houston lawyer and former Marine colonel representing
Banuelos, repeatedly has said that while the shooting was unfortunate, it
wasn't a crime.
"At some point we need to let Clemente Banuelos know what he did was what
he was supposed to do and let it go," Zimmermann said earlier. "Cpl.
Banuelos' actions were entirely justified under the law and consistent with
what he was trained to do."
Zimmermann said his client wouldn't comment on the case.
Rangers Claim Obstruction
Duncan argued that subpoenas were ignored, documents were hidden and
Marines at times were kept from him and others.
He said Banuelos and his team had ample time to rehearse their stories, and
they retraced their steps before state investigators could question them
the day of the shooting.
"Law enforcement succeeds because people respect the system and fear the
consequences of their actions. I almost feel like the Marines never had
either one," Duncan said.
At one point after the shooting, Banuelos sat in a sports utility vehicle
and spoke to an unidentified military officer as state investigators waited
outside in the rain to interview the corporal, according to Coyne's report.
The Border Patrol, which had been overseeing the Marines as part of an
effort to monitor smuggling, refused to let its agents testify before a
state grand jury unless they got an advance copy of the summary of
questions, according to a letter from an attorney for the U.S. Immigration
and Naturalization Service, the patrol's parent agency.
A later memorandum noted the Justice Department and the district attorney,
Valadez, had agreed that Border Patrol agents only would testify about
observations at the scene of the shooting and what the Marines were wearing.
The agents were further told the Justice Department had asked they be
available for questioning by a defense attorney the morning of their grand
jury testimony.
Duncan was angered by the move and said he was told the Marines were not
available to him when, in fact, they were meeting privately with Banuelos'
attorney.
The Marine report, prepared by Coyne and a staff of 22, provides the most
comprehensive look yet at the shooting.
Although summaries and some statements given to investigators were released
to the public, the Pentagon repeatedly has declined to release the bulk of
the document.
Coyne's report says Banuelos and his team were inadequately trained, gave
troubling answers to investigators and provided a dying Hernandez with
"substandard first aid by any human standard."
"No training prepared the Marines to recognize a humanitarian duty to
render aid," Coyne wrote. "The potential for encountering civilian
casualties in counter-drug operations should have been a recognized element
for planning and training."
The report concluded "an analysis of the results of the investigations
fails to reveal any evidence -- as distinguished from lingering suspicions
-- that Cpl. Banuelos acted for any reason other than protecting his team
in a manner consistent with his Marine Corps training."
Patrols Suspended
Defense Secretary William Cohen suspended anti-drug patrols along the
border soon after Hernandez was killed.
Cohen's advisers warned him the public was angry about the shooting and the
use of armed patrols on anti-drug missions along the border.
Judith Miller, general counsel for the Defense Department, bluntly told
Cohen that should another Redford-like incident occur, "we will not be able
to protect those involved from possible criminal action from state officials."
"While as a policy matter that risk may be acceptable, it is not a risk
that I am comfortable with in light of the experience to date with the
state of Texas," Miller wrote to Cohen in a July 23, 1997, letter that's
part of Coyne's report.
The shooting touched off a behind-the-scenes debate among Marine Corps
officials, and between the Marines and the Justice Department.
Barry Kowalski, a ranking official in the Justice Department's Office of
Civil Rights, which reviewed the killing, said a reasonable law enforcement
officer facing the same circumstances as (Banuelos) wouldn't have fired at
Hernandez.
Kowalski said the civil rights probe was launched, in part, because of
concerns about why Hernandez was killed, but the Justice Department didn't
seek an indictment in the case.
The agency sent Presidio County officials boxes of documents from its grand
jury probe and suggested a state grand jury take a second look at possible
state charges against the Marines for reckless or negligent homicide.
The Presidio County grand jury reviewed the documents and again refused to
indict.
Admire, then commander of the 1st Marine Division at Camp Pendleton,
Calif., where the Marines were based, disputed Coyne's report and
Kowalski's comments and said the Marines acted appropriately.
"The training proficiency of the Marines was demonstrated by their
compliance with military regulations, civilian laws, and their restrained
but protective actions during a dangerous situation," Admire said in an
April 1998 letter to his superiors.
He chastised Kowalski as "an arrogant at best and disingenuous at worst"
federal prosecutor who used the bully pulpit to attack the Marines' integrity.
"This offends the ideals of justice," Admire's letter said. "But those who
it most offends are those who serve our nation at home and abroad."
Diagram Of A Tragedy
For three days in the brush, Banuelos led three men who'd never trained
together before and weren't elite reconnaissance troops. A truck driver,
forklift operator and a radioman, their mission was to spy on a nearby
crossing point on the Rio Grande known as El Polvo, Spanish for dust.
They approached Redford, a place their superiors told them was hostile and
home to locals who worked with drug traffickers.
Meanwhile, Hernandez arrived home on the school bus at about 4 p.m. After
dinner, he studied for his driver's license exam, then grabbed the rifle
that had been in his family for three generations and went to herd the goats.
Hernandez, who considered joining the Marines and had a recruiting poster
on his bedroom wall, often carried the rifle for target practice and to
protect the goats from wild animals, his family said.
As he walked with the goats, the team of Marines was about 200 yards away
and making its way through the brush.
Banuelos radioed he saw an armed man who appeared to be herding goats,
according to transcripts of the transmissions.
Suddenly, the Marines fell to the ground.
"We're taking fire!" Banuelos yelled into the radio.
The Marines later told investigators two shots whizzed by them.
"As soon as he raises that rifle back down range, we're taking him,"
Banuelos said into his radio.
"Roger . . . ahhh . . . fire back," responded a corporal at Border Patrol
headquarters in Marfa.
Eighteen minutes after Banuelos' first transmission, Hernandez lay dead,
sprawled over an old well from an Army outpost used to guard against raids
by Pancho Villa.
A military pathologist later determined the injuries "were so severe that
he would have died, even if he had been shot inside a hospital emergency
room."
U.S. Rep. Lamar Smith, R-San Antonio, wrapped up his investigation of the
shooting earlier this month by saying the Border Patrol was at fault for
not supervising the Marines better and the Defense Department was at fault
for not giving the Marines better training.
"Both agencies made terrible mistakes that contributed to this tragedy,"
said Smith, chairman of the House subcommittee on immigration.
Meanwhile, the Rangers won't drop the case until the death of Hernandez and
the actions of the Marines are aired before a trial jury.
"They thought they didn't have to answer to civilian law," Ranger Capt.
Barry Caver said of the Marines and their leaders. "They didn't respect us
or the system. No one is exempt from the law."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lawyers In Tobacco Case Will Receive $8.2 Billion (The New York Times
says dozens of attorneys who represented the first three states to settle
with the tobacco industry over alleged health care costs - Florida,
Mississippi and Texas - were awarded $8.2 billion in fees Friday, the richest
legal payday in the nation's history. The fees will be paid by cigarette
smokers, who weren't represented in the legal wranglings.)
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 11:23:59 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US NY: Lawyers In Tobacco Case Will Receive $8.2 Billion
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Jim Galasyn
Source: New York Times (NY)
Contact: letters@nytimes.com
Website: http://www.nytimes.com/
Copyright: 1998 The New York Times Company
Pubdate: Sun,Dec 12, 1998
Author: BARRY MEIER
LAWYERS IN TOBACCO CASE WILL RECEIVE $8.2 BILLION
The lawyers who represented the first states to settle with the tobacco
industry over health care costs were awarded $8.2 billion in fees Friday,
the richest legal payday in the nation's history.
The money, which will be divided among dozens of lawyers who represented the
states, Florida, Mississippi and Texas, is the first to result from a series
of tobacco cases that culminated last month in a $206 billion settlement
between tobacco companies and 46 states and five United States territories.
That broader settlement, which did not include Florida, Mississippi and
Texas, appears likely to produce billions more for plaintiffs' lawyers.
The three states settled their suits for a total of $34.4 billion to be paid
by cigarette makers over 25 years. The legal fees awarded Friday were
determined by an arbitration panel set up under an agreement between tobacco
producers and plaintiffs' lawyers that will also be used to award legal fees
from the larger settlement last month.
The fees will be paid by cigarette makers, and their payments, which are
limited to $500 million annually, will run until all the lawyers' claims are
settled. The payouts will not affect the amounts received by the states.
Cigarette makers are likely to pass on the fees, like the rest of the recent
$206 billion settlement, to smokers.
In awarding $8.2 billion, the arbitration panel gave the lawyers credit for
taking the risks of being first to test the legal strategy of suing the
tobacco industry to recover Medicaid costs related to smoking. It awarded
far less than some of the lawyers had claimed; five trial lawyers hired by
Texas, for example, wanted $25 billion for negotiating that state's $17.3
billion settlement.
But the size of the awards -- those five Texas lawyers will get $3.3
billion -- quickly provoked criticism from legal experts who said the huge
recovery by the states did not justify traditional contingency-style
rewards.
"Twenty-five percent of $1 million is one thing," said Geoffrey Hazard, a
professor of law at the University of Pennsylvania who earlier opposed
payment of large fees to the Texas lawyers. "Twenty percent of $1 billion is
another thing."
In determining fees, the arbitrators started by awarding lawyers in the
three states 10 percent of their state's settlement. Then the panel
multiplied those figures 1.9 to 3.5 times depending on what it perceived to
be the risks and work undertaken by the lawyers in each state.
Under those formulas, lawyers hired by Florida received $3.4 billion for
reaching a $13 billion settlement last year and lawyers for Mississippi got
$1.4 billion for forging a $4.1 billion settlement last year. The
Mississippi lawyers got the highest percentage award, 33 percent, after the
panel determined that they had taken the greatest risk by representing the
first state to sue the tobacco industry, in 1994.
In the tobacco litigation, state attorneys general hired lawyers to pursue
their claims against tobacco producers under contingency-style contracts
that gave the lawyers 10 percent to 25 percent of a state's recovery.
But in reaching the three state accords and the recent $206 billion
settlement plan, the tobacco industry and plaintiffs' lawyers agreed to
submit the lawyers' fee claims to arbitration for resolution. For each
settlement, fees would be determined by a three-member panel, one member
selected by the tobacco companies, one by the plaintiffs' lawyers and the
third by common agreement.
Cigarette makers had championed arbitration as an equitable way of resolving
fees. But they quickly chafed last week when they reviewed fee requests from
plaintiffs' lawyers, and yesterday the arbitrator they selected sharply
dissented over the size of the awards.
In a statement, that arbitrator, Charles Renfrew, a former United States
District Court Judge, said that although he believed the results achieved by
the lawyers were outstanding, the awards exceeded all reasonable limits and
that some lawyers had not even keep time records.
"Each of the three state awards rendered by the majority is clearly
excessive and to me incomprehensible," Renfrew wrote.
The neutral member, John Calhoun Wells, said in a telephone interview
yesterday that the unhappiness of tobacco and plaintiffs' lawyers over the
awards indicated that the arbitration process had worked.
The situation of the three states was unique because tobacco producers had
formally agreed not to argue against the lawyers. Industry lawyers said no
such agreements exist with lawyers representing other states and Wells said
that the bar would be far higher for the next lawyers seeking fees.
"These three states were of a totally different cast," he said. "They were
trailblazers."
In Minnesota, where the state and a health insurer settled their cases this
year for $6.5 billion, tobacco companies agreed to pay the plaintiffs'
lawyers $427 million, or about 7.1 percent of the recovery. Those lawyers
were highly regarded by many observers and the size of Minnesota's
settlement increased the recoveries by Florida, Texas and Mississippi and,
as a result, awards to those lawyers.
The biggest winners in yesterday's awards and others to come soon from the
arbitration panel are Dick Scruggs, a plaintiffs' lawyer from Pascagoula,
Miss., and Ronald Motley and Joe Rice, who work in the same law firm in
Charleston, S.C. Along with shares of the Texas, Florida and Mississippi
cases, the men represented more than 30 other states in cases against the
tobacco industry.
Steven Yerrid, a plaintiffs' lawyer in Tampa, who had helped represent
Florida in its case said that he believed that the $3.4 billion paid to him
and his colleagues was justified. He said that the costs come from the
industry, rather than the state, and added that he would have received
nothing if the lawsuit had failed.
"We just wanted everyone to live up to the bargain," Yerrid said. "Because
if we would have lost under that bargain we won't have gotten a dime."
The state lawsuits were based on novel legal theories that asserted that
cigarette makers were responsible for the health care costs created by their
products. To pursue the claims, some lawyers spent tens of millions of
dollars and invested years investigating cigarette makers and producing
thousands of previously secret documents. All the cases, however, were
settled.
John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University, said the agreement
between industry and plaintiffs' lawyers to arbitrate fees privately was an
effort to avoid potential political roadblocks.
In the Congressional debate over a $516 billion Senate tobacco bill that
failed earlier this year, several amendments were offered that would have
sharply limited lawyers' fees.
Coffee said that his concern was not so much with size of the fees but the
fact that some state attorneys general had hired trial lawyers who had
contributed to their campaigns.
"I think we need plaintiffs' attorneys but we need the process in which they
represent the public to be purged of political overtones," said Coffee.
"This was probably the biggest pay-to-play issue of all time."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Activist Denounces Prison System (The Cincinnati Enquirer
says Angela Davis, best known for the trails she blazed in the late 1960s
and early 1970s, spoke to a packed auditorium at Northern Kentucky
University Friday night and criticized today's prison system.)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 21:19:44 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US OH: Activist Denounces Prison System
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Source: Cincinnati Enquirer (OH)
Contact: letters@enquirer.com
Website: http://enquirer.com/today/
Copyright: 1998 The Cincinnati Enquirer
Pubdate: 12 Dec 1998
Author: SUSAN VELA
ACTIVIST DENOUNCES PRISON SYSTEM.
NKU Audience Hears Angela Davis
HIGHLAND HEIGHTS - Angela Davis, best known for the trails she blazed in
the late 1960s and early 1970s, criticized today's prison system Friday
night before a packed auditorium at Northern Kentucky University.
Businesses profit from more people going to prison and more prisons having
to be built, Ms. Davis said.
But prisons don't rehabilitate people, she added, saying there are better
ways of holding people accountable for committing crimes. Most often, she
said, blacks and Latinos, the illiterate, the homeless and the mentally
deranged are filling the jail cells. Ms. Davis spoke passionately, letting
her voice dip from high to low and using her hands to emphasize her
long-standing support for political prisoners and this country's booming
prison population.
Ms. Davis pointed to two celebrated cases:
Mumia Abu-Jamal, on death row in Pennsylvania for what some believe is a
wrongful conviction for murdering a police officer in 1982.
Leonard Peltier, an American Indian who is jailed for murdering two FBI
agents in South Dakota more than 20 years ago.
She urged the crowd to think, know their history and do something about the
racial and social injustices inherent in today's the prison system.
"I think we're on the verge of a new era of activism, I really do," she
told the crowd. "People want to bring about a change. I ask all of you to
think very deeply about ways you can get involved." Ms. Davis was in the
national spotlight in 1969, when she was removed from her teaching job at
UCLA's philosophy department for being a member of the Communist Party.
She also became a voice for the Black Liberation Movement and, in 1970, her
efforts to free prisoners the Soledad brothers sparked a heated trial and
led to her own arrest and imprisonment. She was accused of murder,
kidnapping and conspiracy in a hostage situation at which she was not
present. She was acquitted in 1972.
A year later, she founded the National Alliance Against Racist and
Political Oppression. Ms. Davis now is a tenured professor in the history
of consciousness department at University of California-Santa Cruz.
While speaking Friday, she noted that many people her age often introduce
themselves to her by saying, "I'm from the '60s." She finds it odd that
some people use the decade as they would the name of a hometown.
She noted said that these people often romanticize the era and forget about
the horrors that sparked many of its movements. She admitted her own
naivete then in regards to the the nation's prisons. She never thought so
many would be built to house so many prisoners.
In the '60s, fewer less than 200,000 people were in prison. She remembers
contending that some foreign nations were less populous. But, now, there
are almost 2 million people behind bars. And between 1852 and 1965, 12
prisons were built. At least 20 have been constructed built since 1984, she
said.
"I think we should ask ourselves how this happened," she said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In D.C., Marijuana Dispute Hits A Raw Nerve (The Philadelphia Inquirer
suggests District of Columbia residents are less upset about the
ramifications for medical-marijuana patients than they are about the lack
of local control evidenced by Congress's quashing of Initiative 59,
the medical-marijuana initiative that won handily, according to exit polls.)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 10:24:38 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US DC: MMJ: In D.C. Marijuana Dispute Hits A Raw Nerve
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: Philadelphia Inquirer (PA)
Contact: Inquirer.Opinion@phillynews.com
Website: http://www.phillynews.com/
Copyright: 1998 Philadelphia Newspapers Inc.
Author: Chris Mondics, Inquirer Washington Bureau
Pubdate: Sun, 13 Dec 1998
IN D.C., MARIJUANA DISPUTE HITS A RAW NERVE
The Issue, Some Say, Is Not Whether Smoking Pot Helps The Sick But Home
Rule For City Residents.
WASHINGTON -- When Wayne Turner finally managed, after years of sidewalk
activism, to gather enough signatures in August for a referendum here on
the medical use of marijuana, he felt a sense of accomplishment.
His domestic partner, Steve Michael, whose weight had dropped from 185 to
110 pounds as a result of AIDS, had started smoking marijuana in a
last-ditch attempt to stimulate his appetite. Last May, just before he
died, Michael asked Turner to keep up the fight.
But Turner's joy in getting the issue on the November ballot soon turned to
frustration.
Three weeks before the election, after the ballots had been printed,
Congress passed legislation barring district officials from carrying out
the election. Sponsors of the bill said they feared that the referendum
would legalize the recreational use of marijuana -- an outcome that Turner
said was not his intent.
The election went forward, and, according to one exit poll, the measure was
approved. But city officials have declined to release the results, saying
that to do so would violate the restrictions Congress passed.
The controversy over whether the outcome should be made public has opened
old wounds among Washington residents who have long chafed at Congress'
power, established by the Constitution, to manage district government. Many
say the matter has less to do with the medical use of marijuana than with
the rights of district residents to govern themselves.
'Huge Resentment'
"There is huge resentment over this," said Eleanor Holmes Norton, the
district's nonvoting member of Congress. "The taking away of [ a ] vote is
one of those insults that is felt from the poorest communities to the
richest. This was a gratuitous election-year stunt."
In August, Norton pleaded with Rep. Bob Barr (R., Ga.), the sponsor of the
bill in Congress, to drop the measure as he prepared to offer it as an
amendment to the budget bill. She failed. The measure was soon approved by
a voice vote. Barr, who said he had not been convinced that there were
medical benefits to using marijuana, said district residents must accept
such congressional oversight in exchange for the money the federal
government spends on the city.
"The majority of the taxpayers who provide these dollars are opposed to
efforts to legalize mind-altering drugs," Barr said. "This is nothing more
than a thinly veiled attempt to legalize a frequently abused [ drug ] ."
City officials, saying Barr's law violates the First Amendment rights of
district residents, have joined with the American Civil Liberties Union in
a suit asking the federal District Court here to reverse Congress and let
the vote count be made public.
Proponents acknowledge that the Constitution probably does give Congress
the right to overturn the election results, even if the court eventually
rules that they should be made public and certified. But they say Congress
does not have the authority to prevent an election that gives district
residents a chance to be heard on the issue.
Critics Want To See Limits
The ballot question, called Initiative 59, would allow marijuana to be
used, under a physician's direction, in the treatment of AIDS, glaucoma,
muscle spasms, cancer, and "other serious illnesses." What troubles some
critics is that it places no limits on how much a person may possess,
simply saying patients are entitled to have "sufficient" amounts for the
treatment of their illnesses.
The medical community is divided over the benefits that smoking marijuana
can provide to seriously ill patients.
Turner, president of the local chapter of ACTUP, the gay activist
organization, was supported in his campaign by the Whitman Walker clinic in
Washington, which treats up to 5,000 AIDS patients a year. For a small
number of patients, said clinic associate director Patricia Hawkins,
marijuana helps stimulate the appetite and moderate the effects of
chemotherapy.
"We believe it is a decision that ought to be left up to the patient and
the physician," she said.
Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Nevada and Arizona passed initiatives in
November legalizing the medical use of marijuana. Only the District of
Columbia, with its unique relationship to the federal government, was
stopped from having its votes counted.
"You can't get a more glaring example of congressional interference," said
Mark Plotkin, a Washington radio commentator. "This is just a punitive and
embarrassing attempt to humiliate us."
The battle is the latest in a long-standing conflict between district
residents and the federal government over how the district should be
governed. Some constitutional scholars say the conflict dates back to 1783,
when a band of former Revolutionary War soldiers marched on Independence
Hall in an attempt to force the Pennsylvania legislature to pay them back
wages.
Congress, which also was meeting in Philadelphia at the time, grew alarmed
by the disturbance and blamed Pennsylvania authorities for failing to
control the situation. When the Constitution was adopted several years
later, the framers, some of them citing that incident, gave Congress
authority over all matters in the national capital.
Congress has not been shy in using that power. It wasn't until 1961 that
the 23d Amendment to the Constitution was approved giving district
residents the right to vote in presidential elections. A few years later,
in 1974, Congress permitted district residents to elect their own mayor and
council.
But district residents have no voting representatives in the House or
Senate. Moreover, Congress periodically steps in to veto laws that it deems
objectionable. That was the case several years ago when Congress overturned
legislation passed by the City Council establishing a needle-exchange
program.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Speech Becomes Drug War Casualty (Chicago Sun-Times columnist
Robyn Blumner says first the drug warriors took away the Fourth Amendment
right to be free from unreasonable searches. Now Congress has decided
that the right of citizens to be heard in an election is disposable -
that is, if Congress doesn't like the election results. Our government's
doomsday rhetoric about drugs is no longer being swallowed whole.
Which makes the powers that be very nervous, and correspondingly makes this
a dangerous time for free speech.)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:32:59 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: US: OPED: MMJ: Free Speech Becomes Drug War Casualty
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: mgreer@mapinc.org
Pubdate: Sat, 12 Dec 1998
Source: Chicago Sun-Times (IL)
Section: Commentary
Contact: letters@suntimes.com
Website: http://www.suntimes.com/
Copyright: 1998 The Sun-Times Co.
Author: Robyn Blumner
FREE SPEECH BECOMES DRUG WAR CASUALTY
Gutting The Fourth Amendment Didn't Work, So Warriors Now Have Other
Freedoms In Their Sights
First the drug warriors attached our right to be free from unreasonable
searches and seizures. In the name of fighting the illicit drug trade,
they told us they needed to be able to use drug-sniffing dogs on cars
without a warrant, to search inside garbage cans and peer into backyards in
helicopters without a court order, to seize cash, the family car and boats
where trace amounts of drugs were found. And the courts let them.
Congress has decided that the right of citizens to be heard in an election
is disposable -- that is, if Congress doesn't like the election results.
After citizens got a medical marijuana initiative on the ballot in
Washington D.C., U.S. Rep. Bob Barr (R-Ga.) slipped an amendment into a
massive federal appropriations bill to prohibit the District of Columbia
Board of Elections and Ethics from spending any money on it.
Although exit polls show that 69 percent of voters approved the November
initiative, we may never know the official results. John Ferren, the
district's corporation counsel, estimates that it would cost only $1.64 for
a clerk to press the computer button to make the results known.
This kind of viewpoint-based restriction on voting rights violates the
First Amendment.
A lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of the National
Capital Area and joined by the district seeks to emancipate the election
results and limit Congress' ability to use its power of the purse to stymie
voters in the future.
"Congress wants to prohibit any initiative that would reduce the penalties
for marijuana, but allow any initiative that would increase those
penalties," said ACLU legal director Arthur Spitzer. "That is like saying
voters can vote for Republicans but not for Democrats.
Restricting speech by doctors is another way our nation's drug warriors are
trashing the First Amendment of further their cause.
After initiatives passed in California and Arizona in 1996 to legalize
marijuana for medical use, the Justice Department, drug czar Barry
McCaffrey and Drug Enforcement Administration chief Thomas Constantine
pledged to punish any doctor who recommended its use.
Again, the ACLU sued, and a federal district judge in San Francisco issued
a temporary restraining order blocking the federal government from
prosecuting doctors for recommending marijuana. Judge Fern Smith ruled
that the government was trying to silence a medical viewpoint with which it
disagreed.
Another innovative approach was concocted by Rep. Gerald Solomon (R-N.Y.)
who introduced unsuccessful legislation in the past to strip the tax
exemption from any nonprofit group advocating the reform of drug laws.
Rational, nuanced arguments persuaded voters in six states so far (and
probably the District of Columbia) to legalize medical marijuana, and more
will probably follow.
Our government's doomsday rhetoric on drugs is no longer being swallowed
whole. Which makes the powers that be very nervous, and correspondingly
makes this a dangerous time for free speech.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
UVic poised to fire pot-growing prof (The Times Colonist, in Victoria,
British Columbia, says the president of the University of Victoria is calling
for the dismissal of a sociology professor found guilty of operating
a marijuana grow operation. Under the Human Rights Code, it is discriminatory
to fire someone for an offence unrelated to their employment.)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 10:45:41 -0800 (PST)
To: mattalk@listserv.islandnet.com
From: arandell@islandnet.com (Eleanor and Alan Randell)
Subject: UVic poised to fire pot-growing prof
Newshawk: Alan Randell
Pubdate: December 12, 1998
Source: Times Colonist (Victoria, B,C, Canada)
Contact: jknox@victoriatimescolonist.com
UVic poised to fire pot-growing prof
By Susan Danard
Times-Colonist Staff
UVic's president is calling for the dismissal of a sociology professor
found guilty of operating a marijuana grow operation.
David Strong said Friday he is recommending the UVic board of
governors dismiss sociology professor Jean Veevers
She was suspended and relieved of her duties at the university
effective Friday.
"The action results from a review of evidence submitted to the B.C.
Supreme Court, which demonstrates that Dr. Veevers offered to pay the
tuition of a prospective UVic student as an inducement for that person
to continue as a partner in the illegal activities which led to Dr.
Veevers' conviction.
"This constitutes grounds for dismissal," Strong said. Veevers was
fined and given a conditional 12-month sentence - to be served in the
community - after she was convicted of cultivating marijuana and
possession for the purpose of trafficking.
Veevers declined to comment on the university's call for her
dismissal. But her lawyer, Mel Hunt, said, "she most certainly will be
fighting it and will pursue all legal remedies in that regard."
Hunt said Veevers offered to lend tuition money to a 32-year-old man
who was a partner in the grow operation and interested in studying
engineering.
But the loan was not an inducement to continue the well-established
partnership and the man never took her up on her offer.
The move to fire her from UVic "will be fought on the grounds that
this is totally unfair and that they do not have grounds for
dismissal," Hunt said.
"Her involvement in this gentleman and this illicit activity she
engaged in had absolutely nothing to do with her role as a professor
at the university of Victoria."
Under the Human Rights Code, it is discriminatory to fire someone for
an offence unrelated to their employment.
Depending on whether Veevers goes to arbitration over Strong's
recommendation to dismiss her, her case could go before the board of
governors at a time between six weeks and several months.
The university will not provide further comment until that process is
completed, Strong said.
RCMP officers raided Veevers' residence in April, 1997, seizing 122
marijuana plants and 8.6 kilograms of marijuana.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeoman Of The Weed (An account in The Economist, in Britain,
about the marijuana growers on the Caribbean island-nation of St. Vincent
who have organized against the United States' eradication efforts there,
says the farmers' plea for regulation is not as reasonable as it sounds.
Ignoring the example of Cayman Islands banks, the magazine
says the United States would never agree to decriminalisation,
and if it did, or itself legalised marijuana, the price of ganja
would probably collapse.)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 07:19:28 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: Trinidad: Yeoman Of The Weed
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 1998 11:03 PM
To: dlbck@nwol.net
Newshawk: Alan Randell
Source: Economist, The (UK)
Contact: letters@economist.com
Website: http://www.economist.com/
Copyright: 1998. The Economist Newspaper Limited.
Pubdate: Sat, December 12, 1998
YEOMAN OF THE WEED
Trinidad
American marines flew helicopters around the forested slopes of St
Vincent's Soufrere volcano this week, ferrying Caribbean police and
soldiers to hot spots where air photos show fields of marijuana. The
island's ganja farmers, to use their word, had been tipped off. Some
took an early harvest. More significantly, this time the farmers chose
to do what most other businesses do all the time - they lobby.
With the raids imminent, the Committee of Concerned Citizens and Ganja
Farmers sat down on November 17th with the island's highly respectable
Chamber Industry and Commerce. They wrote to non-inhaling Bill
Clinton. They held meetings and demonstrations. And they asked,
without success, to meet Sir James Mitchell, the prime minister, whose
formal request for American help initiated the raids.
Drug barons? Hardly. Most of the few hundred growers are models of
hard work and enterprise, growing a crop that few West Indians see as
criminal at all. Few dirty their hands with the island's cocaine
trafficking. These are small businessmen, proud of their hard-earned
houses and pick-up trucks. Their crop is consumed locally or exported
to nearby islands. Who suffers? About all of St Vincent's economy can
boast of is bananas, off-shore banking, tourism, and ganja farming.
With its tourism no pile of gold, its small-scale banana growers now
under pressure from competition and American trade bullies, it is
crazy, say the ganja farmers, to crack down on them. Why not
decriminalise their crop and let them get on with the job?
That is not as reasonable as it sounds. The ganja trade, like that of
cocaine, helps corrupt the entire Caribbean. The United States would
never agree to decriminalisation. And if it did, or itself legalised
marijuana, the price of ganja would probably collapse. What best suits
the ganja farmers, though they are loath to admit it, is continued
illegality - but enforced, at worst, only with plenty of warning.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Medicopolitical digest - Lords criticise government's response to cannabis
report (The British Medical Journal says the chairman of the House of Lords
science and technology committee, which produced a report last month
saying physicians should be allowed to prescribe herbal cannabis to patients,
has called on the government to "give more mature consideration
to our recommendations.")
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 17:22:06 -0800 (PST)
To: "DRCTalk Reformers' Forum" (drctalk@drcnet.org)
From: hadorn@DNAI.COM (David Hadorn)
Subject: BMJ: Lords criticise government's response to cannabis report
Reply-To: drctalk@drcnet.org
Sender: owner-drctalk@drcnet.org
BMJ 1998;317:1663 (12 December)
Medicopolitical digest
Lords criticise government's response to cannabis report
The chairman of the House of Lords science and technology committee, which
produced a report on cannabis last month (14 November, p 1337), has called
on the government to "give more mature consideration to our recommendations."
Miss Claire Rayner, chairman of the Patients Association (PA), told the
Central Consultants and Specialists Committee that she would like to set up
a consensus conference on risk benefit of different conditions to help
educate patients. She hoped that from now on doctors and patients could work
together in a more consensual way, and said that the PA was encouraging the
development of patient liaison groups. She criticised the fact that there
was only one lay person on primary care groups and suggested that the PA and
the BMA should protest jointly to the government about the lack of resources
The committee recommended that cannabis should be reclassified as a schedule
2 drug, allowing research and prescription on a named patient basis. Lord
Perry of Walton told the Lords that doctors and pharmacists would be able to
prescribe and dispense the drug legally. The government rejected this and
said that it would not allow prescription of any drug "which had not been
tested for safety, efficacy and quality."
Lord Winston, professor of fertility studies at the University of London,
said that cannabis might have some rare dangers,"but those risks are clearly
much less than with many other drugs." Many patients who have given evidence
of potential benefit were often desperately ill or dying. Lord Winston said
that, given proper controls, there was not the slightest evidence that
implementation of the recommendations would increase recreational use. He
criticised the government for ignoring a serious committee, which includes
fellows of the Royal Society and a Nobel prize winner.
A former head of a police drugs squad, Lord Mackenzie of Framwellgate, sided
with the government. He said that the United Nations had defined cannabis as
a dangerous narcotic. "It should remain such here until we are properly
satisfied by evidence to the contrary."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Ecstasy Users Face Consequences Of Neurotoxicity (The Lancet, in Britain,
says "experts" who met at the Novartis Foundation conference in London
on Dec. 4 asserted that the drug methylenedioxymethamphetamine, or MDMA,
also known as ecstasy, is a human neurotoxin, and one dose could be enough
to damage serotonergic neurons. The "experts" said the functional
consequences of such lesions remain unknown, but could include mood disorders
and memory difficulties. A decade of research has shown that MDMA causes
a deficit of brain serotonin in every animal species tested, said George Ricaurte
of Johns Hopkins School of Medicine in Baltimore, though such lesions
have persisted for no more than 7 years in any animal.)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 16:17:34 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: UK: Ecstasy Users Face Consequences Of Neurotoxicity
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Martin Cooke (mjc1947@cyberclub.iol.ie)
Source: Lancet, The (UK)
Contact: lancet.editorial@elsevier.co.uk
Website: http://www.thelancet.com/
Copyright: The Lancet Ltd
Volume 352, Number 9144
Pubdate: 12 Dec 1998
Author: Kelly Morris
ECSTASY USERS FACE CONSEQUENCES OF NEUROTOXICITY
The recreational drug methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA; Ecstasy) is a
human neurotoxin, and one dose may be enough to damage serotonergic
neurons, scientists reported last week. The functional consequences of such
lesions remain unknown, but may include mood disorders and memory
difficulties, according to experts who met at the Novartis Foundation
(London, UK) on Dec 4.
A decade of research has shown that MDMA causes a deficit of brain
serotonin in every animal species tested, said George Ricaurte of Johns
Hopkins School of Medicine (Baltimore, MD, USA). Most experts now agree
that such lesions, which have persisted for up to 7 years in some animals,
represent selective destruction of serotonergic nerve endings, and several
strands of evidence indicate that similar deficits occur in people (Lancet
1998; 352: 1433-37 ). Ricaurte is concerned that neurotoxicity occurs in
non-human primates with doses of the drug that are in the range of human
use--even one dose may be sufficient to damage neurons, he warned.
But what are the functional consequences of such lesions? "There is a
general consensus appearing that people taking a lot of Ecstasy are
experiencing a range of problems", noted Andy Parrott (University of East
London, London, UK). Fabrizio Schifano (Padova, Italy) added that
individuals who had taken more than 50 MDMA pills had a strikingly
increased risk of psychiatric disorders--particularly depression,
psychoses, cognitive impairments, and eating disorders--compared with drug
users who had taken fewer than 50 pills.
But, "the human data are fraught with experimental difficulties", noted
Parrott. Observed problems might represent premorbid factors that
predispose individuals to take Ecstasy, for example.
And Ecstasy users tend to take other drugs and have other factors that can
confound observations. Longitudinal studies are badly needed to determine
which conditions develop with MDMA use, and whether they are reversible.
Una McCann (National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD, USA)
speculated that the risk of neuropsychiatric problems will increase as MDMA
users age. But Shane Collins, drugs spokesperson for the UK Green Party,
warned that young people tend not to respond to scare messages,
particularly when scientific uncertainties exist.
Nevertheless, until key questions are resolved, science may be able to
provide some practical advice for those who continue to use Ecstasy --keep
cool and avoid alcohol.
Ricaurte noted that, in animals, the degree of neurotoxicity is closely
correlated to body temperature, and Schifano reported that the concomitant
use of alcohol increased the likelihood of psychiatric symptoms.
- Kelly Morris
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug Smugglers' European Union (The Guardian, in Britain, says the arrest
of Gungor Tekin, a famous Turkish soccer player who started serving a 23-year
sentence in a British jail this week after being convicted of heroin
smuggling, has cast light on the new international links of the heroin trade.
What has emerged from the case and other recent operations is that there is
now a European criminal community that is cooperating far more successfully
than their ministerial counterparts.)
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 14:48:55 -0800
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: mapnews@mapinc.org
Subject: MN: UK: Drug Smugglers' European Union
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Martin Cooke (mjc1947@cyberclub.iol.ie)
Pubdate: Sat, 12 Dec 1998
Source: Guardian, The (UK)
Contact: letters@guardian.co.uk
Website: http://www.guardian.co.uk/
Copyright: Guardian Media Group 1998
Author: Duncan Campbell, Nikolai Chavdarov and Antoaneta Nesheva
DRUG SMUGGLERS' EUROPEAN UNION
Gungor Tekin was one of Turkey's most renowned international
footballers, a hero to the fans of not one but two of the country's
biggest clubs. This week he is starting a 23-year sentence in a
British jail after being convicted of a heroin smuggling operation
that has cast light on the new international links of the heroin trade.
What has emerged from the case and other recent operations is that
there is now a European criminal community that is cooperating far
more successfully than their ministerial counterparts. While eastern
European countries are still negotiating over entry into the EU,
criminal gangs across Europe have joined forces to exploit what is
still a growing market.
The Turkish, Bulgarian and Kosovan Albanian mafias have linked with
Czech couriers to supply British-based Turkish and English dealers
with heroin. Customs officers are frustrated that the organisers are
still sitting safely in Turkey.
Gungor Tekin played his football with the Turkish clubs Galatasaray
and Fenerbahce and later in Canada - but before the enormous explosion
in wages and signing-on fees. On retirement he aspired to a lifestyle
he could not afford. Initially he tried to set up a business exporting
black London cabs to Turkey. He also dabbled unsuccessfully in the
property market. Then contacts in the Turkish criminal underworld in
north London suggested that heroin was a simple way to recoup his
losses. Five years ago, he set up a base in a flat off the Edgware
Road in central London.
But his contacts soon brought him to the attention of Customs and
Excise investigators who put him under surveillance. He had hired a
young Turk, Mustafa Mus, as his driver and translator and linked up
with a third man, Yucel Konakli, who lived in the Turkish heartlands
in Haringey, north London.
Tekin flew backwards and forwards to Turkey and Northern Cyprus where
he dealt with one of the six main crime organisations running the
heroin trade there. He set up a 70 kilogram smuggling operation which
would have netted his team UKP6 million.
For this he needed a driver to bring the heroin through Europe. Turks
arriving with suspicious loads have recently fallen foul of Customs
intelligence operations so a Czech, Jan Jisl, was hired. He was told
to come with his wife and child to give the impression he was on a
family shopping holiday.
When he arrived at Ramsgate in a Czech-registered minibus, he was
immediately under surveillance.
He met his Turkish contacts in their car at the Travel Lodge on the
M2, little knowing that they were being followed all the way. They
were arrested in London when it was becoming obvious that they were
being tailed.
On Monday at Kingston crown court Tekin was jailed for 23 years,
Konakli for 18, Jisl for 16 and Mus for 11. The case has provided a
window into the new order of the heroin trade in Europe.
Jisl came from Liberic, near Prague. Another driver from the same town
was also arrested last year and jailed for 25 years. The town and that
area of the Czech republic have become a centre for exiled Kosovan
Albanians who provide the link in the heroin chain from Turkey.
Chris Harrison, the senior investigating officer with Customs who led
the operation, said yesterday: "The Turks are ingenious people. They
will use any method open to them."
Kosovan Albanians had now emerged as major players in the link between
the Turks and the eastern European couriers. This has prompted claims,
supported by some eastern European agencies, that the Kosovan
resistance is now being financed by the heroin trade.
Mr Harrison says that a percentage of the heroin profits may certainly
go to the Kosovan resistance but he believes that Kosovan drug
traffickers would be involved in the trade regardless of the conflict.
Kosovan Albanians have rented houses in villages outside Prague where
their deliveries from Turkey arrive via the Balkan route. Couriers
then take it to Germany and onwards to Belgium, Spain and the
Netherlands.
While the Kosovan Albanians have emerged as the new major players, the
Czech republic has established itself as the crossroads for east and
west traffic.
Earlier this year, Jiri Komorous, the Czech national drug squad chief,
said that his country had now become "the centre of the heroin and
cannabis trade in central Europe".
In another international link-up, Turkish traffickers have used
Bulgarian organised crime gangs to guard their shipments en route. One
of the routes is now through Bulgaria and on to Macedonia, Albania and
Italy.
The other new development has been the growing use of containers to
smuggle heroin following a significant number of seizures of lorries
with Turkish origins. Bulgarian police sources indicate that another
new route is via container from the port of Varna to ports in the UK
and Spain.
"There is no Mr Big, just a lot of people with good connections," said
Mr Harrison. "And they never step outside an area they don't control."
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Myths Stubbornly Resist Debunking - "Character weaknesses" demolished
(A translation of an article from Tages Anzeiger, in Switzerland, presents
a brief historical overview of current American drug policy, emphasizing
its basis in myth, and the harm caused by myths that stubbornly endure.
They lead to false generalisations, faulty assumptions, half-truths, cliches,
and repression, yielding ground but slowly to rational argument
and the sweet voice of reason.)
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 16:27:22 -0800
To: maptalk@mapinc.org, mattalk@islandnet.com
From: Pat Dolan (pdolan@intergate.bc.ca)
Subject: Switzerland: OPED: Myths Stubbornly Resist Debunking
Newshawk: Harald Lerch (HaL@main-rheiner.de)
Source: Tages Anzeiger (Switzerland)
Copyright: Tages Anzeiger 1998
Pubdate: Sat, 12 Dec 98
Website: http://www.tages-anzeiger.ch/
Translator: Pat Dolan
MYTHS STUBBORNLY RESIST DEBUNKING
"Character weaknesses" demolished
(Translator's note: The article lays out a brief historical overview of
current American drug policy. Writers of LTEs and others should find it
valuable for its accuracy, clarity and simplicity. pd)
History makes clear that the legal status and pharmacological properties of
a substance tell us nothing about its harmfulness. In 1875, San Francisco
was the first town in the western world to enact legislation against opium.
It targeted the smoking of opium by Chinese immigrant laborers, who, now
that work on the great transcontinental railway had been completed, were
seen as a source of unwelcome competition in the labor market. In 1850, the
situation was very different. The immigrants were seen as a source of cheap
labor for the railroad and the gold rush. Knowing them to be extraordinarily
efficient workers, employers offered them opium in addition to their wages as
a recruitment incentive.
Cannabis use was regarded a a Mexican affair. Imported Mexican agricultural
laborers smoked marihuana to relax. During the economic crisis of
1929-1933, they were suddenly seen as unwelcome competition. They were now
charged with responsibility for all kinds of petty crime and this,
allegedly, was caused by their abuse of cannabis. In response to this
growing pressure from areas where there was a large proportion of Spanish
speaking immigrants, the government saw itself obliged, in 1937, to pass an
anti-marihuana law.
Cocaine policy, to conclude, was decided in a time of divisive race
politics, and the opportunity was seized to make scapegoats of American
negroes. Although there was ample evidence that cocaine use was by no means
widespread amongst black people, and that the use of cocaine and heroin was
considered chique in white bourgeoisie circles, blacks were charged with
committing rape and other crimes whilst under the influence of cocaine.
This demonisation of cannabis and the opiates led to discrimination against
those troublesome minorities identified in the public mind with their use.
Through the internationalisation of American drug policies, many of the
associated myths were transferred to Switzerland and new ones created.
Myths evoke emotional responses and inhibit the capacity for dealing in a
rational manner with differences of opinion, and for making corrections
once a path has been engaged.
Myths stubbornly endure. They lead to false generalisations, faulty
assumptions, half-truths, cliches, and repression, yielding ground but
slowly to rational argument and the sweet voice of reason.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to the 1998 Daily News index for Dec. 10-16