Pubdate: Tue, 18 Dec 2001
Source: Times-Picayune, The (LA)
Copyright: 2001 The Times-Picayune
Contact:  http://www.nola.com/t-p/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/848
Author: Gwen Filosa

CLASH OVER RAVERS' RIGHTS RAGES ON

U.S. Defends Curbs In 'Club Drug' Battle

At times, some of the more hardcore fans of the electronic music scene have 
peeled the dried-up Vicks Vapo Rub off their cloth dust masks and eaten it, 
a DEA official testified in federal court Monday.

"Because it feels good going down," explained David Gauvin, who holds a 
doctorate in biological psychology and helps the government track illicit 
drug use at his Washington, D.C., office.

Gauvin was part of the federal government's defense against the civil 
lawsuit brought by the American Civil Liberties Union over whether fans 
have the right to bear glow sticks and pacifiers in the State Palace 
Theater, the regional hot spot for the all-night dance parties called raves.

Ecstasy users are known to sometimes chew on pacifiers to alleviate teeth 
grinding -- something that can occur when taking the drug. Dust masks are 
often used with inhalants by Ecstasy users to heighten the drug's effects.

At issue is whether prosecutors infringed on ravers' rights to free speech 
and protection from illegal searches when they crafted a plea bargain that 
included such a ban with the men who organized the dance parties.

U.S. District Judge Thomas Porteous Jr. presided over the one-day trial but 
didn't rule from the bench Monday. He gave both sides until Jan. 10 to file 
briefs on the question of constitutional law only.

The temporary restraining order Porteous issued in August that prohibits 
the government from banning glow sticks and the like from the Palace 
remains in effect. However, at recent raves, the Palace has observed the 
bans anyway, according to rave attendees.

Monday's trial broke no new ground, but essentially revisited the question 
of when policing ends and constitutional protections begin. The two Drug 
Enforcement Administration agents who helped bust the Palace raves in 
August 2000 took the stand and described the venue as a drug-soaked party 
where undercover agents bought drugs about 80 times.

But critics of the government's criminal case said the reality is not that 
simple. Were the teens on the DEA videotape staggering outside the Palace 
because they were high or simply tired from dancing until dawn? Did they 
flash glow sticks as an art form or a way to heighten Ecstasy's sensory rush?

And did the government clean up the raves and save lives by going after the 
promoters because pacifiers and dust masks are in the same category as 
bongs and syringes?

During Gauvin's testimony, Porteous said, "You can use a spoon to melt 
heroin. Should we ban spoons?"

"No, you could just use something else," said Gauvin, who has publicly 
called raves "crack houses" designed only to spread drugs from the laser 
light-filled dance floors to college campuses and rural areas.

After fighting the case since January, Barbecue of New Orleans, of which 
Robert Brunet is president, pleaded guilty in August to violating the 
"crack house law" that makes using a building for selling and taking drugs 
a federal crime.

The plea ended the quest of the U.S. attorney's office to rid New Orleans 
of Ecstasy and other "club drugs," but the national debate over the 
government's pursuit of the promoters rather than drug dealers has continued.

No one ever accused Brunet, his brother Brian Brunet or local party 
promoter Donnie Estopinal of selling drugs. Instead, then-U.S. Attorney 
Eddie Jordan secured indictments against the three men, charging them with 
permitting the old theater to double as a decadent lair of Ecstasy that 
sent scores of people to emergency rooms between 1997 and 2000.

While prosecutors said Barbecue came up with the idea of banning pacifiers, 
glow sticks, surgical-type masks and mentholated inhalants from the Palace 
Theater on Canal Street, the ACLU contends the government bullied the 
promoters with the threat of criminal charges.

The ACLU brought back Clayton Smith, one of the three named plaintiffs in 
the civil suit, for Monday's trial. Boyish and clean cut, Smith told how 
security guards made him throw away his rave accouterments at the Palace door.

"When they took away glow sticks they took away one of the ways we 
perform," he testified. "One of the most important elements of a rave is 
freedom. Dance how you want to dance, dress how you want to dress."

Since the ban, Smith said, the music at the Palace raves hasn't been the 
same. The progressive style of electronic music, or "trance," which drew 
many glow stick performers to the dance floor, is rarely heard.

"The music has changed," he said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart