Showing posts with label War on Drugs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War on Drugs. Show all posts

Friday

Dispatches from the Field: Women in Prison -- An American Growth Industry

 However high the cost of justice,
the cost of injustice is greater still.

Who says “American Exceptionalism” is dead? Not when it comes to incarceration. Nowhere on Earth -- except the USA -- does a country put more of its citizens in prison. And, increasingly, those citizens are female.

In 1980, before the War on Drugs became big business and prison corporations were allowed to regain a toehold, there were 12,300 women incarcerated in the United States. By 2008, that number had grown to 207,700. The rate of increase between 1995 and 2008 alone was a staggering 203%. The $9 million dollars it cost to incarcerate female offenders in 1980 has now ballooned to over $68.7 billion.

Who are these women, and how did they come to be caught in the web of the prison-growth industry?

By and large, these are young women who have less than a high-school education, have a history of being battered and/or sexually abused, and, with that, a resultant history of drug abuse. They are more likely to be HIV positive or infected with Hepatitis C, have either symptoms or a diagnosis of mental illness, and prior to incarceration were unemployed. While young African American women are the fastest growing incarcerated population, roughly 49% of women in prison are white, 28% are African American, and almost 17% are Latina. More than two-thirds are incarcerated for drug, property, or public order offenses. And the vast majority are mothers of minor children.

Here’s one such story.

Oklahoma, Not OK
How do you tell your children you are going
to prison? How do you prepare for this?
~Patricia Spottedcrow

On New Year’s Eve 2009, in rural Kingfisher County, Oklahoma, Patricia Spottedcrow, a 24-year-old Cheyenne mother of four, and her mother, Delita Starr, sold a “dime bag” of marijuana out of Starr’s house for eleven dollars. Two weeks later, the person who sought them out for the first buy came back for a twenty-dollar bag. The buyer turned out to be a police informant.

Spottedcrow and Starr were charged with distribution and possession of a dangerous controlled substance in the presence of a minor, and were offered a plea deal of two years in prison. Having no priors, meaning they’d never been in trouble with the law, and having been busted for such a small amount, they turned the deal down. Both women pled guilty, thinking they’d get “community service and a slap on the wrist.”

Unfortunately, as is too often the case, it didn’t play out that way. Though it was a piddling amount of money and a first offense, in the eyes of Kingfisher County Judge Susie Pritchett, because Spottedcrow’s mother made the actual sale of the “dime bag,” and Spottedcrow’s nine-year-old son made change, Spottedcrow had involved three generations in a “criminal enterprise.” Seeking to teach her a lesson for selling thirty-one dollars’ worth of marijuana (and showing up for sentencing with traces of marijuana in a coat pocket), Judge Pritchett gave the young mother twelve years in prison -- ten years for distribution and two years for possession -- to run concurrently, with no probation. In addition, she fined Spottedcrow $4,077.89.

Starr was given a thirty-year sentence, suspended so she could care for her grandchildren. She was also saddled with five years of drug and alcohol “assessments,” plus $8,591.91 in court fees and fines. At $50 a month, she’s now paid off $600 of it. Her monthly income is $800.

Believing she would be released on probation, Spottedcrow made no preparations for her incarceration. When her sentence was handed down, she was taken into custody without having a chance to say goodbye to her children, shackled, and transported three hours away to Dr. Eddie Warrior Correctional Center, where she became a minimum security prisoner at a cost to Oklahoma taxpayers of $40.43 a day -- ten dollars more per day than the total cost of marijuana sold in two separate incidents combined, and $25 more per day than it would have cost the state to provide drug treatment, were that available in Kingfisher County.

Eddie Warrior, a state-run facility that opened its doors in 1989, was built to house fifty women to a dorm, one or two to a cubicle. Just six years later it was at capacity. In the four-part documentary, Women in Prison, Eddie Warrior case manager Teri Davis states that shortly thereafter, with the facility already full, “they started hauling people in.” Now there are a hundred-and-twenty inmates to a dorm, some with serious communicable diseases, living in rows of bunks four feet apart.

“The inmates don’t like it,” says Davis. “And who would? Crammed up with another inmate in your face, coughing because she’s sick, coughing all over you . . . packed in like sardines in a can, with no amenities.”

Perhaps most disturbing about conditions at Eddie Warrior is that they are not unusual. Lurking behind the injustice of Spottedcrow’s harsh sentence is a darker story of human rights violations in America’s female prisons. In Inside This Place, Not of It: Narratives from Women’s Prisons, compiled and edited by Robin Levi and Ayelet Waldman, female inmates speak of atrocities “ranging from forced sterilization and shackling during childbirth, to physical and sexual abuse by prison staff.” Describing their lives as harrowing and rife with misogyny, author Peggy Orenstein declares their treatment “utterly unacceptable in a country that values human rights.”




For the privilege of living in these deplorable conditions, Spottedcrow’s sentence means a burden to taxpayers of nearly $150,000 in incarceration costs alone. This is the price to an already strapped society for a person’s having sold 0.105821 ounces of an herb that is considered harmless on the one hand, and highly beneficial on the other. Multiply that by the thousands incarcerated in Oklahoma, and then multiply that by the other forty-nine states. In fact, Oklahoma attorney Josh Welch, who is working for Spottedcrow’s release, predicts that if Oklahoma continues its current practice of incarcerating “anybody who comes before a judge” for drug-related offenses, even for a first offense, “it will bankrupt the state.”

However high the cost of justice, the cost of injustice is greater still.

A Clear Case of Civil Rights Violations

I’m just a human being trying to make it in a world that is very rapidly losing its understanding of being human.
~ John Trudell, a “blue Indian”

A growing civil rights movement in Oklahoma is demanding Spottedcrow’s release. The Society to Preserve Indigenous Rights and Indigenous Traditions (SPIRIT) got involved in Spottedcrow’s case “because she is Native American, poor, and a minority,” says Brenda Golden of SPIRIT. “We are not pro-marijuana and do not advocate breaking the law. But we do believe Patricia's sentence is way too harsh for the crime she committed and is indicative of the treatment we receive in Oklahoma….  We are committed to continuing the fight to get this sentence reduced so Ms. Spottedcrow can be reunited with her four small children.”

Trial Attorney Josh Welch took her case pro bono. Calling it an “abuse of judicial authority,” he filed a motion in Kingfisher County to modify her sentence, saying, “A judge’s responsibility is to help people, not just punish them.” On Monday, October 3, Mr. Welch received an Order from Associate District Judge Robert Davis modifying Spottedcrow's sentence from the original twelve years to eight years in prison with four years’ probation. Welch says he’s happy the sentence was modified, but not happy that only four years were removed. "The new judge didn’t back off the first sentence. He said the reduction was because she had done well while incarcerated. We disagree with the sentence. She shouldn’t even be in jail.”

“This may not be easy,” Welch told SPIRIT’s Brenda Golden in an email, “but we will not stop until she's released.” Welch plans to file an Application for Post-Conviction Relief. Change.org has created a petition to the Governor of Oklahoma requesting a pardon for Spottedcrow. As of this writing, they’ve gathered almost 35,000 of the 50,000 signatures needed.

A Trail of Tears

In the Women in Prison documentary, Judge Susie Pritchett, who imposed the original sentence, states that Spottedcrow “needed to learn that there were consequences to this lifestyle she had chosen.” Tragically, and in direct opposition to the sort of outcome the judge would seem to favor, Spottedcrow’s lifestyle was indeed forever changed. Because of her conviction, she can never again pursue her chosen field. Her “chosen lifestyle” was that of a certified medical assistant employed by a nursing home. When the economy tanked, not because of any choice Spottedcrow made, she lost her job. In fact, almost half of all incarcerated women were unemployed in the month before their arrest. Spottedcrow was not the first to look for a way to make some “easy money” when things got tight. But as she conceded in an interview with Ali Meyer of Oklahoma News Channel 4, “It was a stupid mistake that I paid an awful lot for.”

Speaking of consequences, however, what about the consequences of Judge Pritchett’s actions? Seventy-five percent of incarcerated women are mothers, most of them parents of children under age eighteen. What happens when the state takes a mother away from her children for an entire decade?

Children do hard time for their parents’ crime
~ womenandprison.org

Children of female inmates are at enormous risk to continue the cycle and end up in prison themselves, according to another Women in Prison participant, Dr. Laura Pitman, Deputy Director of Female Offender Operations for the Oklahoma Department of Corrections, who adds that thirty percent of the female prison population had at least one incarcerated parent themselves. African-American children are nine times more likely than white children to have a parent in prison and Hispanic children are three times more likely than white kids to have an incarcerated parent. All told, a million and a half children in America have a parent in state or federal prison, which, according to the Family and Corrections Network, “means a crisis for that child.”



           
The effect on Spottedcrow’s children has been devastating. Aged 1, 2, 4, and 9 at the time of her arrest, all but the eldest are unable to comprehend her disappearance. And because Spottedcrow is housed a full three-hours’ drive from her mother’s home, her family is unable to visit. As the youngest learns to talk, she knows her mother only as a voice on the phone. Meanwhile, Starr tries to explain to her grandkids. “It’s hard. The little girls do not understand why their mom’s gone…. The baby had a real hard time. We’ve spent nights crying. . . . She goes to the bedroom door and knocks: ‘Mama! Mama!’ And we cry.”

In Long Beach, California, when members of The Human Solution learned of Spottedcrow’s plight, they took up a collection and arranged for her children to receive new clothes to wear on a trip to visit their mom. In return, the Oklahoma woman who helped arrange the clothing donation made a cash contribution to The Human Solution so people would have gas money for court support. Thus, the movement to free prisoners of the drug war grows bigger and stronger.
  
The Two Joes: “We’ll Do This My Way”

It also grows louder. On Wednesday, November 2, 2011, angry protesters screamed in frustration outside Long Beach Courthouse, where former medical marijuana dispensary owners Joe Grumbine and Joe Byron were quickly losing ground. In preparing for their upcoming trial, Judge Charles D. Sheldon had eliminated as “irrelevant” all medical evidence. “We’ll do this my way,” he said, ruling out the two doctors who were prepared to testify that the Joes were, at the very least, qualified medical-marijuana patients. Having already been denied the right to defend themselves as legally compliant dispensary owners, the Joes had retreated to their fall-back position -- that of being patients first. But with his latest decision, Judge Sheldon had taken that away, too.

Protesters claimed the judge had denied the Joes their 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the law. In two previous California medical-marijuana cases, defendants had been allowed an affirmative defense, meaning they were able to tell the jury they were legally compliant dispensary owners, as well as qualified medical-marijuana patients. In one such case, the defendant was found not guilty. In the other, the case was dismissed "in the interest of justice." Not so for the Joes.

Kangaroo Court

Like Patricia Spottedcrow, Grumbine and Byron have turned down plea deals, choosing instead to exercise their right to a jury trial. Motivated by the same do-good instincts that led them to create a medical-marijuana collective in the first place, they put their fate in the hands of a jury for the sake of all medical-marijuana patients and caregivers. They hoped to solidify the legal standing of their fellow patients and dispensary owners, along with their own, in a precedent-setting case. They thought the jury would hear all the facts. They were wrong. Instead, says Grumbine, it’s “a steamroller to conviction.”

Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when you’re always afraid
You step out of line, the man come and take you away
~ Buffalo Springfield, “For What It’s Worth”

At a November 9 hearing -- their twenty-second court appearance -- the Two Joes suffered yet another defeat. Having filed a motion to quash the warrant that triggered a massive tri-county raid and turned their lives upside down, Grumbine and Byron had to appear before Judge Judith L. Meyer, who signed the original warrant. She denied the motion. After opining that the medical-marijuana-dispensary thing “is all a sham,” Judge Meyer reminded the defendants that their next court date with Judge Sheldon was on November 23 "in Department K, as in Kangaroo.” To quote Dr. Hunter S. Thompson out of context once again, “Jesus! How much more of this cheap-jack bullshit can we be expected to take?” Kangaroo court, indeed.

Don’t get out of jury duty, get into it!

Grumbine and Byron have only one defense left: the defense of last resort – Jury Nullification. Simply put, Jury Nullification (or “Juror Nullification”)  means a juror has the power – nay, the awesome responsibility – to refuse to convict if they believe the law is corrupt or the proceedings have been compromised. The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) was created to inform American citizens that “juror veto – juror nullification – is a peaceful way to protect human rights against corrupt politicians and government tyranny.” With thousands of people in the street, and Occupy Wall Street demonstrators getting arrested in droves for rising up against government tyranny and abuse of power, the time for J-Null may have come.

Jurors Can Stop Government Tyranny by Refusing to Convict

As a juror, your first and greatest duty is to your fellow citizen. While jury duty may sometimes require you to punish a fellow citizen for breaking the law, it may also, at times, require you to protect your fellow citizen from tyrannical abuses of power by government officials.

Jury convictions, right or wrong, just or unjust, are almost never overturned. In a recent case in Georgia, Troy Davis was executed even after many jurors, upon hearing new evidence, tried to take back their guilty verdict. Imagine having to live with the knowledge that you sent a man to his death, based on insufficient or false evidence. In the case of Grumbine and Byron, there was no victim. Both defendants were motivated by a desire to help end suffering by providing patients legal access to a plant that helps and heals. For this, each now faces up to seven years in the slammer.

“Jurors cannot be required to check their conscience at the courthouse door,” says FIJA. Rather, they are empowered to use it in court, with absolutely no fear of retribution. So, in the future, don’t get out of jury duty, get into it. The life you save could be Joe Grumbine’s.

We’ll take a closer look at Jury Nullification in an upcoming post. In the meantime, FIJA has created a Juror’s Handbook to help inform potential jurors of their legal authority to refuse to enforce corrupt laws. “Short of being elected to office yourself,” says FIJA, “you may never otherwise have a more powerful impact on the rules we live by than you will as a trial juror.”

*****

In 1995 Cynthia Johnston directed public relations for an online publication, Sources eJournal, covering intelligence, espionage and terrorism. There, she wrote a three-part series, “Confessions of a CIA Brat.” She also wrote a business column, “In the Loop,” for an independent filmmaking web publication and several pieces for Bay Area computer magazine Micro Times. After Sources went down in the dot.com crash of the late Nineties, she took a leap of faith, moved into a funky cab-over camper, and started living curbside on the streets of San Francisco. She began her first blog before blogging was a word. Her online journal earned her the opportunity to write a piece, “Mobile Homeless,” for The San Francisco Chronicle. She’s been blogging ever since.
           
Johnston began writing about her experience as a medical marijuana patient as soon as she “got legal.” She went public on behalf of legalization in 1980 with the California Marijuana Initiative and a headline: “Marijuana Protester Busted at High Noon.”




Saturday

Dispatches from the Field: War Without End

It does not matter if the war is not real, or when it is, that victory is not possible. The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous.
~ George Orwell, 1984

While it’s fairly well known that the United States Constitution was written on paper made from the controversial hemp plant, it may come as a surprise to know that growing hemp, also called cannabis, or marijuana, was once mandatory. Indeed, our first marijuana law, written in 1619 in Jamestown, Virginia, ordered all farmers to grow “Indian hemp seed.” During hard times in the mid-1760s, a farmer could be thrown in jail for not growing it. By 1850 we had over eight thousand hemp plantations, boasting at least two thousand acres each.

George Washington and Thomas Jefferson both grew hemp. In a 1794 note to his Mount Vernon gardener, Washington said, “Make the most of the Indian hemp seed and sow it everywhere!” Washington and Jefferson were known to exchange gifts of a smoking mixture that was definitely not tobacco.

Many of our forefathers were said to have smoked marijuana. Given the inspired concepts inscribed in the Declaration of Independence -- that all men are created equal, that they are endowed with the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of  happiness -- enthusiasts like to say it was written on marijuana.

However, long before the birth of our nation, from the 5th century B.C. until the advent of the steamship in the 19th century, hemp was a mainstay in commerce. In the shipping industry, for instance, ninety percent of all rigging, ropes, wood sealant, flags, maps, logs, Bibles and clothing, as well as the canvas sails themselves, was made from hemp. Today’s industrial uses include biodegradable plastics, construction materials, biomass fuels (renewable energy,) health food and medicine.

Proponents claim that hemp, the world’s only known fully-sustainable natural resource, can meet our paper, textile, transportation and home-energy needs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, clean the environment, and rebuild depleted soil, all while healing the sick. “In other words, it’s the greatest plant on Earth,” concludes a narrator in Melissa Balin and Jack Herer’s short film, The Emperor Wears No Clothes.

So, after a couple dozen centuries of being the greatest plant on Earth, how did marijuana suddenly become Public Enemy #1?


Greatest Plant or Loco Weed?

Between 1910 and 1920, during the Mexican Revolution, destitute immigrants from Mexico provided cheap farm labor, especially in the Southwest. This created tension with local workers, as unemployment and the encroaching economic depression stretched racial tensions past the breaking point. The use of marijuana in Mexican culture made easy targets of both marijuana and Mexican people.

All Mexicans are crazy and this stuff is what makes them crazy.
~ Texas lawmaker, 1919

California was the first state to outlaw “loco weed.” At the time, 1913, Congress lacked the power to outlaw drugs or alcohol at the federal level. Alcohol prohibition, which lasted from 1919 to 1933, required an amendment to the Constitution, while drug laws were passed piecemeal, behind closed doors. But the nasty business we know as the War on Marijuana began in earnest in 1930 with the creation of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a Division of the U. S. Treasury Department.

Its first director, the ruthlessly ambitious Harry J. Anslinger, made cannabis prohibition his personal mission in life. He fanned the flames of racism with statements like, “…the primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races. . . . There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers,” baited Anslinger. “Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.”

(Quoting Dr. Hunter S. Thompson only slightly out of context, “It always worked for me.” But I digress.)

The U. S. government responded with the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, making possession of cannabis illegal under federal law, except for medical and industrial use. Meanwhile, other fibers and fabrics were gaining popularity, edging hemp out of the marketplace. After we stopped producing it, we imported Manila hemp from the Philippines.

Enter World War II. After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, we stopped importing hemp from Asia. Once again, the U. S. government had to encourage American farmers to grow it. If you’re looking for an unabashed ode to hemp, forget the hippies. Look instead to the U. S. Department of Agriculture’s 1942 promo film, Hemp for Victory: “Long ago when these [pictured] ancient Grecian temples were new, hemp was already old in the service of mankind.... For centuries prior to about 1850 all the ships that sailed the western seas were rigged with hempen rope and sails….. For the sailor, no less than the hangman,  hemp was indispensable.”

Praising the patriotic farmers who planted 36,000 acres of seed hemp in 1942, the U. S. government set the 1943 goal at 50,000 acres of hemp. (I love the smell of seed hemp in the morning. It’s the smell of….) The film whipped farmers into a frenzy of hemp-based patriotism over the Navy’s quickly dwindling supply of Manila hemp. “When it is gone, American hemp will go on duty again…. Just as in the days when Old Ironsides sailed the sea victorious with her hempen shrouds and hempen sails. Hemp for victory.”

After the war ended, the government shut down all the hemp processing plants and the industry died. Enter William Randolph Hearst, Lammont DuPont and Andrew Mellon to make sure it stayed dead. This unholy alliance set out to destroy the hemp industry once and for all, and they succeeded – to this day.

Although they used racism to whip up anti-marijuana public sentiment, in reality it was just a handy sales tool. The real motive – then and now – was corporate greed and corruption. Newspaper mogul Hearst had a corner on the timber and paper manufacturing market, which was threatened when new techniques and a more efficient hemp harvesting machine promised to undercut papermaking costs by more than half. Unlike trees, hemp was annually renewable and required fewer chemicals in the pulp-making process, so it was easier on the environment, as well. It had to be stopped.

DuPont Chemicals manufactured paper and textiles. Lammont DuPont and William Randolph Hearst were partners in a multi-million dollar paper-making deal. DuPont shared Hearst’s zeal for stamping out hemp as a potential competitor in making plastics and synthetic fabrics. His company had just come out with a new fabric called nylon.

Bankrolling DuPont’s nylon enterprise was Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon – the richest man in America and banker to the stars. He and DuPont believed nylon’s success was dependent upon hemp’s failure. To ensure that outcome, Mellon installed his nephew-in-law, one Harry J. Anslinger, as head of the Bureau of Narcotics.

Meanwhile, Hearst used his newspapers and magazines to smear hemp, calling it “marijuana” and linking it to job-stealing Mexicans, over-sexed African Americans, violent crime, and promiscuity. (Another lasting by-product of Hearst’s personal war on marijuana was “yellow journalism.”)

Though advocates claimed hemp had the power to revitalize the failing U.S. economy, Hearst did such a bang-up job of demonizing it, his propaganda still passes for truth today. And advocates are still claiming it could revitalize the failing economy.


Nixon’s “All-Out War” on Weed

In the late Sixties and early Seventies, President Richard M. Nixon found a way to use the new and improved War on Drugs to target anti-war protesters, liberals and anyone else who got in his way. “You see,” he explained on a May 13, 1971 White House tape, “homosexuality, dope, immorality in general: These are the enemies of strong societies. That’s why the Communists and the left-wingers are pushing the stuff. They’re trying to destroy us.”

The Controlled Substances Act, which Nixon signed into law on October 27, 1970, created five “schedules” for regulating drugs based on medicinal value and potential for addiction. Marijuana was listed as a Schedule I drug with no medicinal benefit. The following year, Nixon created the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse, known as the Shafer Commission after “law and order” Governor Raymond P. Shafer of Pennsylvania, whom he personally appointed to head it up.

The Shafer Commission, after conducting the most comprehensive study of marijuana in American history, wound up recommending that possession and non-profit transfer of marijuana be decriminalized, stating, in part, that the actual and potential harm from using it “is not great enough to justify intrusion by the criminal law into private behavior, a step which our society takes only with the greatest reluctance.”

President Nixon did not share that reluctance. His reaction was to declare “all out war, on all fronts” against marijuana’s legalization.

Common Sense for Drug Policy posted transcripts of the infamous Nixon White House tapes on their website in March of 2002, including this excerpt from a meeting between Nixon and his Chief of Staff, H. R. “Bob” Haldeman, on May 26, 1971:

Nixon: I want a Goddamn strong statement on marijuana. Can I get that out of this sonofabitching Domestic Council? [The Domestic Council was created to shape Nixon’s domestic programs and policies.] 

Haldeman: Sure.

Nixon: I mean one on marijuana that just tears the ass out of them….  You know, it’s a funny thing, every one of the bastards that are out for legalizing marijuana is Jewish. What the Christ is the matter with the Jews, Bob, what is the matter with them? I suppose it’s because most of them are psychiatrists, you know, there’s so many, all the greatest psychiatrists are Jewish. By God, we are going to hit the marijuana thing, and I want to hit it right square in the puss….

Those were the days, my friend. They don’t write comedy like that any more. But seriously, if you’ve been wondering where our insane marijuana laws came from, welcome to the Mother Lode.

It is Nixon himself who represents that dark, venal and incurably violent side of the American character almost every other country in the world has learned to fear and despise.
~Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ‘72

 Declaring drug abuse Public Enemy #1, Nixon established the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in 1973. As a measure of the extent of his geographical reach, author Jerry Beisler wrote in The Bandit of Kabul, “President Richard Nixon offered the King of Nepal $200 million to build a sewer system for the capital city of Kathmandu. The string that was attached to this bribe was that the Kingdom of Nepal would then become the last country in the world to finally criminalize ganja.”


Profiteering in the Drug Wars

These capitalists generally act harmoniously and in concert, to fleece the people.
~ George Washington

Who stands to gain the most from marijuana prohibition? All those who work for government agencies involved in prosecuting the so-called war on drugs, and all those whose businesses gain by having hemp and its derivatives made unavailable for private, commercial, or medical use.

In the public sector, whole bureaucracies have flourished in the war on drugs, including the Drug Enforcement Agency and its precursor, the Federal Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs; the Federal Bureau of Investigation; the Office of National Drug Control Policy; the Federal Bureau of Prisons; the State Department; the Treasury Department; the Justice Department; the Central Intelligence Agency; and the National Clandestine Services, for starters.

To date, more than one trillion tax dollars have been spent on the so-called war on drugs. Over ten billion dollars a year is spent enforcing marijuana laws alone. This gravy train feeds millions of government employees -- from cafeteria workers to bailiffs; from cops to prison guards; from clerks to prosecutors and judges; even legislators -- all of whom collect government paychecks with benefits and retirement packages. And that’s just in the public sector.

In the private sector, where the practices of Hearst, DuPont and Mellon are still very much in play, today’s war on marijuana benefits energy companies intent on killing competition from renewable biomass fuels made from hemp; pharmaceutical companies who stand to lose billions when people discover the specific marijuana strains that allow them to get off prescription drugs, replacing harmful side-effects with harmless feel-good effects; and alcohol and tobacco companies for obvious reasons.

Lesser known cash cows include rehab facilities dependent upon addicts who could be using cannabis to kick hard drugs, and drug testing companies getting fat from mandatory workplace and court-ordered drug testing. Witness the fact that the companies building and operating private prisons are growing while the rest of the economy is shrinking.


Prison Industrial Complex

It’s fixed across the grid, don’t matter what you did
’cause the companies that own the prisons keep the bodies comin’ in.
~ Buxter Hoot’n, “Chief Justice Shepherd”

During alcohol prohibition, organized crime flourished, and so did “law and order.” The same thing is happening today. An entire industry is growing up around the prosecution and incarceration of drug offenders, most of them non-violent users of medical or recreational drugs, even as the truly dangerous drug cartels get bigger. Among these prisoners are medical marijuana cultivators and dispensary owners who, when they were busted, were operating in full compliance with state law.

Because marijuana is still prohibited at the federal level, medical marijuana dispensaries and gardens are being raided and people imprisoned, even in states where voters have legalized it. An undercover cop with a fake ID and a legitimate doctor’s recommendation need only make a few purchases from a medical marijuana dispensary and…gotcha!... he’s caught himself a kingpin. By listing the same “crime” –  selling marijuana – over and over, police can pile on felonies, including conspiracy charges, setting up hapless dispensary owners as “kingpins” while the real kingpins go free.

Once in court, prosecutors “for the People” determine the charges, some of which come with mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimums, enacted by Congress in 1986 during the Reagan/Bush administration, were intended to stop trafficking by international drug cartels. But by taking sentencing control away from judges and putting it in the hands of prosecutors, they also stopped judges from judging. Thanks to mandatory minimums, a judge no longer decides whether the punishment fits the crime.

Other than the actual drug cartels the conspiracy laws were meant to stop, the prison industrial complex seems to be one of the few real winners in this twisted game.
           

Jury Nullification: A Citizen’s Only Weapon
You are the law.
~ Paul Newman, The Verdict

Most of us assume the function of a jury is to determine a defendant’s guilt or innocence. But did you know a juror is also responsible for judging the law itself? That’s right. The power to change a bad law is in the hands of one person. Any person. You, if you happen to be sitting on a jury. An individual juror has the power to say, This is a bad law; not guilty.

Just like that. Hung jury. Trial over.

We the People have the power to change the law, case by case, courtroom by courtroom. Nobody, not the judge, not the cops, not the President of the United States, can punish jurors for exercising their right to repudiate, or nullify, the law that put the defendant on trial in the first place if they find the law unjust. That’s the way our forefathers intended it. People do have the power. We just have to remember how to use it. It’s called “Jury Nullification,” and other than the right to vote, it’s the only true power granted an individual citizen in the United States Constitution.

We may, in the War on Drugs, be up against an historic governmental and corporate monolith -- we may be David to their Goliath -- but the one stone in our sling, Jury Nullification, is a righteous and effective one. Used often enough, it results in changing laws. Just Say, “Not Guilty.”


The Two Joes: A Deal Goes Down in Long Beach

I consider trial by jury as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its Constitution.
~ Thomas Jefferson

On Friday, August 5, 2011, Joe Grumbine and Joe Byron were offered another deal. Referred to as a “wobbler,” the deal stipulated that each would have a felony on their record for “a year or so.” After that, the judge would have the option of reducing it to a misdemeanor, as long as they didn’t get into trouble with the law in the meantime. They turned it down. They’re going to trial.

Joe Grumbine and Joe Byron have put their fate in the hands of a jury. Court support teams are organizing carpools so people from all over Southern California can stand in solidarity with them. “Everything is stacked against us,” said Grumbine. “This is true courtroom drama. Anything can happen.”

Grumbine and Byron will be in court on August 16th for the start of jury instructions. So far, they’ve been denied an affirmative defense, meaning they have not been allowed to tell the judge – nor will they be allowed to tell the jury – that they were operating a medical marijuana dispensary in compliance with state law. The jurors may never hear their side of the story. They may be instructed to hand down a verdict based strictly on a list of felonies. If that happens, Joe and Joe are looking at hard time in a state penitentiary.

The state Appellate Court rejected their motion to dismiss the case based on their denial of defense. They have a new appeal pending with the state Supreme Court. In effect, they still have a chance to start over with an affirmative defense. But the very real prospect of going to trial without one hangs over them like -- to borrow another phrase from the late Dr. Hunter S. Thompson -- a million-pound shithammer.

Court support starts at 7:00 AM with breakfast at Egg Heaven (4358 East 4th Street, Long Beach, CA 90814) courtesy of owner and co-defendant Joe Byron. Green Solidarity Ribbons will be provided. Simply wearing one in public will help educate the jury pool.

Court Support:
8:30 AM
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Long Beach Superior Court, Room 508
415 West Ocean Boulevard,
Long Beach, California 90802

Trial Date: August 22 – 30, 2011.

Solidarity Ribbons and ride-shares are also available through The Human Solution, 951-436-6312.

******

In 1995 Cynthia Johnston directed public relations for an online publication, Sources eJournal, covering intelligence, espionage and terrorism. There, she wrote a three-part series, “Confessions of a CIA Brat.” She also wrote a business column, “In the Loop,” for an independent filmmaking web publication and several pieces for Bay Area computer magazine Micro Times. After Sources went down in the dot.com crash of the late Nineties, she took a leap of faith, moved into a funky cab-over camper, and started living curbside on the streets of San Francisco. She began her first blog before blogging was a word. Her online journal earned her the opportunity to write a piece, “Mobile Homeless,” for The San Francisco Chronicle. She’s been blogging ever since.
           
Johnston began writing about her experience as a medical marijuana patient as soon as she “got legal.” She went public on behalf of legalization in 1980 with the California Marijuana Initiative and a headline: “Marijuana Protester Busted at High Noon.”