Pubdate: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 Source: Cavalier Daily (VA Edu) Copyright: 2003 The Cavalier Daily, Inc. Contact: http://www.cavalierdaily.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/550 Author: Alex Rosemblat Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Ed+Rosenthal (Rosenthal, Ed) FIXING THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA MESS Alex Rosemblat Cavalier Daily Columnist While the debate over the validity and legality of marijuana for medical purposes rages on in governing bodies across the United States, an arguably innocent citizen has been caught in the crossfire. On Jan. 31, Ed Rosenthal, who had been deputized by the City of Oakland, California, to grow marijuana for critically ill patients, was found guilty in a federal court of growing marijuana. He faces up to 85 years in prison as his maximum sentence, which will be decided on June 4. Oakland declared medical marijuana legal under municipal law in 1996 by a 78 percent majority in the Proposal 215 referendum vote. However, the federal judge presiding over this case, Charles Breyer, refused to admit these materials into his courtroom during the trial. A new trial for Rosenthal must include the evidence that he was growing the marijuana for the City of Oakland. If it is legally impossible to include such materials in a federal courtroom, the law for which Rosenthal is being prosecuted, the federal Controlled Substances Act, must be reworked by Congress to allow such evidence in a federal trial. After the two-week trial in which Rosenthal was found guilty, the jurors learned of his motives for growing the marijuana. Six jurors have issued apologies to Rosenthal for their decisions and admitted that they would have voted differently had they known the full story. As one juror, Marnie Craig described it, "It's the most horrible mistake I've ever made in my entire life" ("Jurors Tell Ed Rosenthal They're Sorry," OaklandTribune.com, Feb. 5, 2003). Rosenthal plans to appeal this case, and the jurors themselves are requesting another trial. Rosenthal was not a drug dealer. The plants he was growing were not going to be distributed illegally on the streets of California cities, but rather were going to patients that require marijuana to alleviate their symptoms or perhaps cure them. Unfortunately, Judge Beyer's decision to refuse Rosenthal the right to clear up why and for who he had been growing marijuana was legal. The Controlled Substances Act prosecutes offenders regardless of their intent. The City of Oakland had attempted to provide Rosenthal immunity against prosecution by deputizing him and claiming that he was innocent under provision 885(d), which protects law enforcement officials who hold, buy or sell drugs as part of their job. Judge Breyer ruled that Rosenthal was not covered by this provision. Because federal law supercedes state or municipal law, legal medical marijuana is impossible since federal law does not permit it. By that reasoning, Rosenthal is clearly guilty. However, in this case, he was not growing marijuana plants with criminal intent. Many of the jurors who convicted him claimed that they were misled by the withholding of that fact, and would have voted differently had they been aware of it. This case indicates that the Controlled Substances Act is flawed and outdated. If Rosenthal is granted an appeal case, he and the City of Oakland must be allowed to testify that he was growing marijuana on the city's behalf. If there is enough evidence that Mr. Rosenthal should be convicted under the Controlled Substances Act, the prosecution and judge should have no reason to question the introduction of the information that was withheld in the first trial. If, however, this evidence is never allowed in a federal court, the Controlled Substances Act must be revised to make it available. The law must make it possible for the intent of substance production to be admissible as evidence in a federal court of law. This particular law was written before any cities voted to legalize marijuana for medical purposes, and thus is outdated. Although a municipality cannot just change a law it doesn't agree with, federal law must reflect the needs of the citizens to which it is applied. Laws are subject to change, and as municipalities across the nation discuss making marijuana legal for medical use, it is clear that times are indeed changing. The laws must adjust to meet this change and protect as well as prosecute citizens under the new paradigms of law and current affairs. Rosenthal is innocent under his city law, but guilty under federal law. This is an issue that must be resolved as quickly as possible. Because if even one citizen is being treated unjustly by any law, that is one citizen too many. - --- MAP posted-by: Josh