Idaho has some great scenery and some great skiing, it has the Snake River Canyon, and it has a huge knot of mountains in the middle of the state that are very appealing to those who like rugged, isolated beauty. I had intended to explore them this summer, but I've changed my mind. And this story is the reason why:

Medical Marijuana Defense Falls Flat

REXBURG — The Fremont County prosecutor says a drug bust in Island Park illustrates that claiming a medical use of marijuana with a certificate from another state won't help you in Idaho.

Aurora M. Hathor-Rainmenti, 35 , of Garberville, Calif., was arrested Friday after she was stopped for speeding near Mack's Inn. Fremont County deputies found a baggy containing marijuana in her car with the help of a drug dog.
Hathor-Rainmenti was charged with one count of possession of marijuana and two counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, all misdemeanors.

Fremont County Prosecutor Joette Lookabaugh said Hathor-Rainmenti said she had a certificate from the state of California allowing for medical use of marijuana.

"We want the public to know that medical marijuana certificates, even if they're from surrounding states, are not honored in Idaho," Lookabaugh said.

Okay, I understand this. Idaho is under no obligation to honor a medical marijuana card from a different state. Medical marijuana users be forewarned: If you're headed for benighted redneck country, don't expect your card to protect you.

There is, however, no suggestion that Hathor-Rainmenti is anything other than a legitimate medical marijuana patient. Still, the local prosecutor takes the opportunity to pile on the charges: Not only does she get a pot possession charge, she also gets two paraphernalia charges (did she have two rolling papers, or what?). Absolutely typical, of course, and absolutely disgusting. Just another way for prosecutors to stack the deck. And not limited to Idaho.

Similarly, a judge in Idaho, if he had an ounce of compassion in his body, could take her medical marijuana patient status into account during sentencing. There is no sign he did that:

On Monday Hathor-Rainmenti pleaded guilty to the possession charge and one of the possession of paraphernalia charges. The other paraphernalia charge was dropped.

She was sentenced to five days in jail, with 115 days at the discretion of the court along with an $800 fine.

Nice. Throwing a patient in jail for a victimless crime—and rip her off for $800. Remember, she was not charged with drugged driving—and you better believe she would have been had there been the least suggestion she was impaired. Okay, the sentence was ugly and reprehensible, but still nothing unusual in the fascistoid heartland. But here's the kicker; here's what's got me thinking boycott:

In addition, there is a civil forfeiture under way on the borrowed car Hathor-Rainmenti was driving, as well as on the $514 in cash that was confiscated during the arrest.

Say what?!?! Asset forfeiture laws are supposed to be directed at people getting rich from selling drugs. They're problematic enough in that regard, since they create an incentive for cops to trawl for cash, distorting law enforcement priorities in the constant search for the next big score—with the loot typically used to pay for more cops and more drug dogs to find more cash to seize to pay for more cops and more drug dogs and…In short, they are little more than a form of institutionalized, legalized corruption.

But Hathor-Rainmenti only had a bag of weed. She was not charged with drug distribution. And the state of Idaho is going to steal her car and every penny she had on her? This is nothing but robbery under color of law. This is the criminal justice system as organized thuggery. The thieving state of Idaho can go to hell.

I am sick to death of this sort of crap. It happens all the time, and not just in Idaho. But we have to start somewhere, and that's why I'm suggesting that perhaps a boycott is in order. Idaho is a relatively small state in terms of population, and it is highly dependent on tourism. In other words, it's vulnerable.

I am aware that boycotts are a blunt instrument that may not directly harm the people they are aimed at—the cops who make the busts, the prosecutors who try to hammer good people down, the judges who routinely impose such obscene sentences, the politicians who write the laws. But if the ski resorts in Sun Valley or the river guides and hotel owners along the Snake River Valley start seeing cancellations, perhaps they will be motivated to start putting some money into campaigns to end this evil.

To be honest, I'm getting frustrated with playing games with state legislatures and I'm thinking it's time for some creative direct actions. We can spend years at the statehouse only to win a piddling decriminalization bill. Whoopee! Now you can only steal my stash and a few hundred of my hard-earned dollars instead of stealing my stash and my money and giving me a criminal record and some jail time. That is progress of a sort, but not nearly enough. Ditto with medical marijuana. Why is it that it seems like every new medical marijuana law is more restrictive than the last? Pretty soon we're going to end up with a medical marijuana law somewhere where you have to be dead already to qualify.

So…what about an organized boycott of Idaho, for starters? Would medical marijuana defense groups like Americans for Safe Access get on board with that? Why or why not? What about NORML and the Marijuana Policy Project? Or the Drug Policy Alliance? Just the announcement of a boycott ought to start a real ruckus among the good burghers of Boise.

There are 20 million or so pot smokers in the US, and they have friends and families. We are talking about tens of millions of people who could potentially participate. It could even have a real economic impact, and if that's what it takes to beat some sense into these yahoos, so be it. Individuals could do their part by writing letters to the state and local chambers of commerce, to the state tourism bureau, and to state newspapers explaining why they are going elsewhere this year. Reservations could be made and then canceled. Let 'em feel the pain.

As I've said, I'm getting really tired of progress by the millimeter. I'm open to some creative tactics. A directed boycott is one of them.

Here's another one: The drug defense bar grows rich defending pot people. How about after charging us $5,000 to show up in court and cop a guilty plea and $15,000 to pursue an appeal on constitutional grounds a few hundred times, you give back to the community you grow rich off of? How about a group of you picking a particular egregious locality and pro bono defending every drug case like you meant it? I mean filing motions, going to trial, no plea bargains, demanding jury trials, the works. You could probably freeze the system in a few weeks. Yeah, I know there are issues, but we could work them out.

Sure, things like boycotts and forcing the criminal justice system are messy and difficult. But in the meantime, the wheels of injustice keep grinding away, chewing up our people in the process. Anybody got any better ideas?

Do we begin with boycotting Idaho? Count me in.

The US Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday unanimously approved a bill that would reduce -- but not eliminate -- the disparity in sentencing for federal crack and powder cocaine offenses.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE     
Date:  March 11, 2010                                       
Contact: media@famm.org              
 

BREAKING NEWS:
Senate Judiciary Votes to Reform Federal Crack Cocaine Sentencing Policies
Eliminates first mandatory minimum since Nixon Administration

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Moments ago, the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee unanimously passed a bill that would reduce the sentencing disparity between federal crack and powder cocaine offenses. 

The bipartisan vote to approve an amended version of Senator Richard Durbin’s (D-Ill.) bill, S. 1789, acknowledged that disparate sentencing policies enacted for federal crack cocaine offenses in 1986 have had a negative impact on the nation’s criminal justice system. 

The amended bill would reduce the ratio between crack and powder cocaine from 100:1 to 20:1 and direct the U.S. Sentencing Commission to enhance penalties for aggravating factors like violence or bribery of a law enforcement officer.  Significantly, the bill also would eliminate the mandatory minimum sentence for simple possession of crack.

“This is an exciting vote, but also disappointing.  We hoped the Committee would go further in making crack penalties the same as powder.  There was no scientific basis for the 100:1 disparity between crack and powder cocaine created 24 years ago, and there is no scientific basis for today’s vote of 20:1 ,” said FAMM President Julie Stewart. “However, if this imperfect bill becomes law, it will provide some long-overdue relief to thousands of defendants sentenced each year.

With regard to the bill’s provision that would eliminate the mandatory sentence for simple possession of crack, Ms. Stewart stated, “If enacted, this legislation would repeal a mandatory minimum law for the first time since the Nixon administration.”

Under the Senate’s proposed 20:1 ratio, a conviction for 28 grams of crack cocaine will trigger a five year prison sentence and for 280 grams of crack a 10 year sentence.   The 20:1 ratio could affect an estimated 3,100 cases annually, reducing sentences by an average of about 30 months.  The bill would not, however, reduce sentences for those currently incarcerated for crack offenses.  Impact of the amendment’s other provisions has not yet been calculated. 

The House Judiciary Committee passed its own crack cocaine sentencing reform bill on July 29.  H.R. 3245, the Fairness in Cocaine Sentencing Act of 2009, introduced by Congressman Robert “Bobby” Scott (D-V.A.), removes references to “cocaine base” from the U.S. Code, thus treating all cocaine, including crack, the same for sentencing purposes.

Families Against Mandatory Minimums is a national nonprofit, nonpartisan organization supporting fair and proportionate sentencing laws that allow judicial discretion while maintaining public safety.  For more information on FAMM, visit www.famm.org or contact Monica Pratt Raffanel at media@famm.org

###

To view this email as a web page, go here. To ensure future delivery of emails, please add staff@sentencingproject.org to your safe sender list or address book.

The Sentencing project releases two new reports

fiscal crisis and record incarceration spur trend in prison downsizing

·         4 states - KS, MI, NJ, NY - reduced prison populations by 5-20% since 1999

·         At least 19 states adopted policies in 2009 that promote prison population reductions through sentencing, probation and parole reforms, and reexamining effective public safety

As states grapple with the fiscal crisis and confront costly and overburdened criminal justice systems, two reports released today by The Sentencing Project offer roadmaps to successful prison downsizing that maintain public safety. The reports document a growing trend to reform sentencing policies and scale back the use of imprisonment in order to control spending. 

"Downscaling Prisons: Lessons from Four States," released by Justice Strategies and The Sentencing Project, finds that four states - Kansas, Michigan, New Jersey, and New York - have reduced their prison populations by 5-20% since 1999 without any increases in crime. This came about at a time when the national prison population increased by 12%; and in six states it increased by more than 40%.  The reductions were achieved through a mix of legislative reforms and changes in practice by corrections and parole agencies. The reforms included:

·         Kansas - Changed sentencing guidelines to divert lower-level drug cases to treatment rather than incarceration; Expanded supportive services to people on parole supervision.

·         Michigan - Eliminated most mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses; enacted statewide initiative to reduce parole revocations and enhance employment, housing, and treatment services for people leaving prison.

·         New Jersey - Increased parole releases by adopting risk assessment instruments and utilizing day reporting centers and electronic monitoring.

·         New York - Scaled back harsh drug penalties, established Drug Treatment Alternative to Prison programs, and applied "merit time" credits to speed up parole consideration.

Other states have joined this trend, and 2009 proved to be a high mark for such reforms.  The Sentencing Project's report, "The State of Sentencing 2009: Developments in Policy and Practice," by Nicole D. Porter, highlights reforms in at least 19 states that hold the potential of further prison population reductions. Key among these reforms are:

·         Three states - Minnesota, New York, and Rhode Island - significantly scaled back the scope of mandatory sentencing laws for certain drug offenses.

·         Seven states increased the proportion of "good time" credits to be earned in prison to expedite parole eligibility.

·         Four states Arkansas, Illinois, Nebraska and New Jersey - established oversight committees to examine sentencing policies, prison overcrowding and reentry services.

Figures recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics document a record prison and jail population of 2.3 million as of 2008, but also indicate that the population in state prisons is stabilizing.  Overall, 20 states achieved at least modest reductions in their prison populations between 2007 and 2008.

Access the reports at www.sentencingproject.org or click the links below:

"Downscaling Prisons: Lessons from Four States"

"The State of Sentencing 2009: Developments in Policy and Practice"

The Sentencing Project | 514 Tenth Street, NW | Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20004 | 202.628.0871 | Send an email to The Sentencing Project.

The Sentencing Project is a national organization working for a fair and effective criminal justice system by promoting reforms in sentencing law and practice, and alternatives to incarceration.

Brussels, 4 March 2010
To: Yang Amat Berhormat Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Bin Tun Abdul Razak
Prime Minister of Malaysia

Dear Excellency,

Today we write to you as European citizens concerned with the impact of global drug policies, with an urgent request. We believe the death sentence that is applied to drug law offenders in Malaysia is an inappropriate measure, and would like to offer you our collaboration in identifying better solutions to the drug problems in your country.

With certain regularity, reports appear in the Malaysian press on people being sentenced to death for the possession of illegal drugs, including cannabis. The exact number of those who are actually brought to death remains unknown. Human rights organisations estimate that currently some 300 convicted prisoners await execution on death row, most of them for drug-related offences.

These sentences clearly violate international standards for a fair trial. The presumption of guilt and the mandatory death sentence in drug cases places the charge on the accused to prove his or her innocence and leaves a judge with no discretion over the sentence. Competent legal assistance is unavailable to many of those people, leaving them with little capacity to mount a defence at any stage of the proceedings.

UN human rights bodies have concluded that drug offences fail to meet the condition of “most serious crime”, under which the death penalty is allowed as an “exceptional measure”.

We are aware of the argument that drugs cause problems in Malaysian society. However, we doubt that these problems will be solved by harsh punishments, let alone executions of drug offenders.

Malaysia, like any other country in the world, is not and never will be 100 % drug-free. As long as people in Malaysia want to consume drugs, other people will continue to supply them.

Because of the fact that drugs are prohibited, drug trafficking is the core business of criminal organizations that in most cases operate internationally. The people who are occasionally caught by authorities with relatively small amounts do not have major responsibilities in this business. Killing them will not scare the drug gangs away. On the contrary: thanks to these harsh punishments, the leaders in the drug business can continue to justify extraordinary high prices for their goods,. Thus it maintains a vicious circle of violence and danger.

On the other hand, it is important to make a serious assessment of the problems that drugs may or may not cause. Cannabis for instance is a plant, a natural product, a non-lethal substance. Its consumption has been widespread around the world for thousands of years among many different cultures and people. All these people do not use cannabis because it endangers their health or wellbeing, but rather because they experience the opposite. According to increasing amounts of scientific evidence, the so-called dangerousness of cannabis has been largely exaggerated and driven by moral in stead of rational considerations.

The prohibition of cannabis was installed and promoted worldwide by Western countries, especially the USA, during a period in which they dominated the world. Meanwhile, in most European countries, cannabis possession for personal consumption is not penalised anymore. In a growing number of states in the USA, major law changes are taking place that legally regulate the cultivation and distribution of cannabis to adults for medicinal purposes.

It would be extremely sad to see Malaysia continue executing people found in possession of cannabis, while the countries that have installed its prohibition have come to the insight that this is a useful substance whose consumption can be perfectly integrated in society.

In Europe, during the past decades, we have been able to compare the results of different, sometimes opposing drug policies in societies that are similar in demographical, material and socio-cultural development. The conclusion is that drug policies, whether they are repressive or flexible, have a very minor impact on the drug phenomenon itself. In countries where authorities are relatively tolerant, the use of drugs may be lower than in neighboring countries where policies are more repressive.

Another conclusion is that drugs-related harms can only be reduced by effective social and health policies. Innovative strategies for reaching out to the affected population and reducing the harms related to drug use are needed. The harsh implementation of drug law enforcement is an impediment to the introduction of these strategies.

For these reasons, we are convinced that the death penalty is actually counterproductive to efforts to reduce the harm caused by drugs.

We call upon your wisdom to apply principles of sound governance and let Malaysia join the majority of nations by declaring a moratorium on executions with a view to total abolition of all death sentences for drug offenses, as called for by the United Nations.

We offer you our kind co-operation in transmitting knowledge and experience of public health policies that have proven effective in addressing drug-related problems.

Sincerely yours,

Marisa Felicissimo, Fredrick Polak, Jorge Roque and Antonio Escobar
Members of the Steering Committee of the European Coalition for Just and Effective Drug Policies

Bryan Epis, the first California medical marijuana provider to be prosecuted and convicted for growing marijuana for patients, was sent back to federal prison Monday by a federal judge in Sacrament

Hypocritical Obama and Corporate Media Are Aggressively Undermining Pot Normalization

Please join us for our next Drop the Rock Coalition meeting where we will hold a training for Advocacy Day 2010.

The Obama administration released its Fiscal Year 2011 budget proposal this week, including the