DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 135 Sunday November 7. 1999 McWilliams Not Allowed To Use Medical Defense TO SUBSCRIBE, UNSUBSCRIBE, DONATE, VOLUNTEER TO HELP OR UPDATE YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS PLEASE SEE THE INFORMATION AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS FOCUS ALERT PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE DrugSense FOCUS Alert # 135 Sunday November 7. 1999 McWilliams Not Allowed To Use Medical Defense In 1996 California voters approved a measure to allow the use of medical marijuana. Since then, voters in several other states have done the same. On Friday a federal judge again exhibited the federal government's complete disregard for the will of the people on this issue by ruling that medical marijuana users Peter McWilliams and Todd McCormick will not be allowed to use a medical defense during their upcoming trials for growing the life-saving medicine. Even though the trial hasn't even started, the judge's ruling is an effective death sentence for Peter, who suffers from AIDS and cancer. "I now face ten mandatory years in federal prison. I will die there. My life is over because I tried to save my life doing something my doctor recommended in a state where it is legal. If it happened to me, it can happen to anyone," said Peter in a press release. (For more specifics about the case, visit Peter's website at http://www.petertrial.com) The story is now receiving more coverage from the New York Times (below) as well as other papers. Please write a letter to the NYT, or the LA Times, to speak out about this cruel and unjust action by the federal government. You may also want to try and contact President Clinton via an online chat session Monday night to ask why he and his administration refuse to feel the pain of medical marijuana users. WRITE A LETTER TODAY It's not what others do it's what YOU do PLEASE SEND US A COPY OF YOUR LETTER OR TELL US WHAT YOU DID (Letter, Phone, fax etc.) Please post a copy your letter or report your action to the Sent LTE list at If you are subscribed, or by E-mailing a copy directly to Your letter will then be forwarded to the list so others can learn rom your efforts and be motivated to follow suit. This is VERY IMPORTANT as it is the only way we have of gauging our impact and effectiveness. CONTACT INFO Source: New York Times (NY) Contact: EXTRA CREDIT Please also send a separate copy of your letter to the Los Angeles Times, which ran a shorter story (http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v99.n1204.a11.html). Source: Los Angeles Times (CA) Contact: EXTRA EXTRA CREDIT President Clinton will be taking questions during an internet forum Monday night. Please ask the president why his administration continues its cruel persecution of medical marijuana patients like Peter McWilliams and Todd McCormick even though voters have approved medical marijuana in every state where the issue has been raised. The Clinton event is scheduled to being at 7 p.m. EST Monday. The Internet address is http://townhallmeeting.excite.com. Pubdate: Sun, 07 Nov 1999 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 1999 The New York Times Company Contact: Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Forum: http://www10.nytimes.com/comment/ Related: Websites: http://www.petertrial.com/ http://MarijuanaMagazine.com/ http://McWilliams.com/ LOS ANGELES DRUG CASE BARS MEDICAL MARIJUANA DEFENSE LOS ANGELES -- In a July 1997 raid, police officers and federal agents here found more than 4,000 marijuana plants in a Bel-Air mansion known as the castle, near the home of Ronald Reagan, whose administration created the "zero tolerance" approach to illegal drugs. With a trial scheduled to begin Nov. 16, the case has turned into a test of judicial tolerance for a defense strategy based on marijuana's medical uses. Two defendants, Todd McCormick and Peter McWilliams, advocate legalizing marijuana for medical use and have used it to treat their own ailments: McCormick for pain from cancer treatments that fused several of his vertebrae, and McWilliams for nausea from drugs he takes to treat AIDS. Saying the plants were for personal use and research on a book about medical marijuana, they contend their actions were legal under Proposition 215, the ballot measure approved by California voters in 1996 allowing patients to smoke marijuana with a doctor's recommendation. Federal prosecutors, however, sought and received an order from a federal judge barring the defendants from telling the jury that side of the story, even offering to drop some of the counts against them to keep those issues out of the courtroom. In a ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge George King prohibited the defendants from making any reference to Proposition 215, the purported medical benefits of marijuana or even the federal government's own experimental program, now closed, providing marijuana to patients. The defendants say they are not being allowed to defend themselves. "I'm devastated," McWilliams said in an interview on Friday. "I can't even present my case to the jury. We just have to sit there and listen to the evidence, and we've already admitted everything. Obviously, the federal government is stonewalling any discussion of medical marijuana in any forum." McWilliams, a best-selling self-help author, McCormick, who founded a club that distributes marijuana for medical purposes, and another defendant, Aleksandra Evanguelidi, were among nine people charged with conspiring to grow and sell marijuana. They face minimum prison sentences of 10 years if convicted. Three other defendants have pleaded guilty. In court filings, prosecutors have said the medical issues are irrelevant to the charges, and if allowed into evidence, "will serve only to confuse and mislead the jury." Further, they maintain that if the defendants want to change the government's position on marijuana, they should petition the Drug Enforcement Administration. "Whether the defendants like it or not, the proper challenge is through the regulatory process," Mary Fulginiti, a prosecutor, said in court last month. The trial comes at a time of increasing conflict in America's relationship with marijuana. On Tuesday, voters in Maine approved an initiative allowing medical use, joining six Western states. A report commissioned by the Clinton administration concluded earlier this year that marijuana's active ingredients were useful in treating pain and nausea, though the benefits were limited by the smoke's toxic effects. And in September, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allowed a cannabis club in Oakland to resume providing marijuana to patients, in the face of an injunction from the Clinton administration. Yet marijuana remains classified by Congress as a Schedule I controlled substance, putting it in the company of heroin and LSD. That raised a central question: whether the defendants could assert a "medical necessity defense," maintaining that they broke the law because their health required it. Prosecutors contended that marijuana's Schedule I status precluded such an argument, because it legally defined the drug as having no legitimate use. But defense lawyers maintained that the appeals court decision in the Oakland case opened the door to such a defense. Federal prosecutors are so intent on keeping medical issues out of the courtroom in the case that they agreed to dismiss charges of intent to distribute if the judge barred the medical-necessity defense. Under the law, the defendants could have been allowed to assert that Proposition 215 and their medical conditions contributed to their "state of mind" if they were prosecuted on the intent charges. But with manufacturing charges, state of mind is not relevant. In his ruling, King said the medical-necessity defense would be unavailable to the defendants because allowing them to use it would explicitly contradict a congressional determination. Judge King found that the appeals court ruling in Oakland did not directly address the issue, and he rejected admission of Proposition 215 and medical benefits of marijuana because the government agreed to limit its case to simple manufacturing charges. The number of marijuana plants, which rose to more than 6,000 after the discovery of other growing sites, has led to charges that the defendants sought to reap profits by selling to cannabis clubs, an enterprise not sanctioned by Proposition 215, which allows possession in "personal use amounts." According to court documents, the two men signed a detailed agreement on financing and managing cultivation sites, distribution plans and profit sharing. McWilliams is accused of approaching an employee of a cannabis club with an offer to sell it marijuana, saying that he wanted to become the "Bill Gates of medical marijuana." The case has become a celebrated one with legalization advocates. The actor Woody Harrelson, who was once arrested for planting hemp seeds in a ceremonial protest, put up McCormick's $500,000 bail, and Alan Isaacman, the lawyer who defended Larry Flynt on pornography charges, signed on to defend him. McCormick made his case on the television show "Politically Incorrect." And a fugitive in the case, Renee Boje, who was hired by McCormick to sketch the plants for his book, is profiled in the December issue of Glamour magazine under the headline "Drug Queenpin or Innocent Victim?" Legalization advocates say the results of the case will serve as a barometer of the federal government's willingness to prosecute medical marijuana cases aggressively in states where medical use is legal. "To some degree, the outcome of this case will shape the extent to which the federal government proceeds with additional federal prosecutions for offenses which are no longer illegal under state law," said Keith Stroup, the executive director of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, a lobbyist for marijuana legalization. "If it's a clean victory, it will encourage them to use federal prosecution." SAMPLE LETTER (sent) In the wake of news that a federal judge will not allow medical marijuana patients Peter McWilliams and Todd McCormick to use a medical defense during their upcoming trial for growing marijuana, we are again reminded of the tremendous gap between Washington, D.C. and the rest of the nation. McWilliams and McCormick used marijuana to save their lives. They engaged in an activity they thought had been approved by the voters of California. But instead of letting the people of California take care of their own business, federal officials have used enormous resources to spy on, arrest and now try medical marijuana users. McWilliams and McCormick aren't the first medical marijuana patients to be railroaded through a federal court, and, sadly, it looks like they won't be the last. It's time for every citizen to ask themselves: On whose behalf are federal prosecutors working in cases like this? McWilliams and McCormick have injured no one. They pose a threat to no one. Persecuting citizens who are already under attack by horrible diseases illustrates how desperate federal officials are to maintain their own illusions about marijuana. Despite what the judge and prosecutors in this case may believe, most of us are fully aware that those illusions are not worth the life of McWilliams, the suffering of McCormick or the subversion of the democratic process. Marijuana does not kill human beings, but once again, the war against marijuana is poised to strike down another life. Stephen Young IMPORTANT: Always include your address and telephone number Please note: If you choose to use this letter as a model please modify it at least somewhat so that the paper does not receive numerous copies of the same letter and so that the original author receives credit for his/her work. ADDITIONAL INFO to help you in your letter writing efforts 3 Tips for Letter Writers http://www.mapinc.org/3tips.htm Letter Writers Style Guide http://www.mapinc.org/style.htm Prepared by Stephen Young - http://home.att.net/~theyoungfamily Focus Alert Specialist

Focus Alert Archive