[260] in libertarians
No subject found in mail header
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Vernon Imrich)
Tue Sep 27 02:40:30 1994
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 94 02:38:03 -0400
From: vimrich@flying-cloud.mit.edu (Vernon Imrich)
To: libertarians@MIT.EDU
From borden@netcom.com Mon Sep 26 09:34:22 1994
Received: from netcom2.netcom.com by MIT.EDU with SMTP
id AA15987; Mon, 26 Sep 94 09:35:38 EDT
Received: by netcom2.netcom.com (8.6.9/Netcom)
id GAA06865; Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:33:19 -0700
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 1994 06:33:19 -0700
From: borden@netcom.com (David Borden)
Message-Id: <199409261333.GAA06865@netcom2.netcom.com>
To: libertarians-officers@MIT.EDU
Subject: MOTHER OF TWO CONVICTED FOR MEDICAL MARIJUANA -- PLEASE HELP
Status: RO
******************************************************************************
Drug Reform Coordination Network (DRCNet)
Rapid Response Team
******************************************************************************
On July 4, 1979, Jan Pleas was seriously injured when a fragment from an
Independence Day firecracker flew into her left eye, damaging it
permanently. The resulting glaucoma caused Pleas a level of pain that she
could equate only with the pain she experienced in giving natural childbirth
to a 21 inch diameter baby. The difference, of course, is that the pain of
childbirth is temporary and short-term, whereas Pleas' glaucoma is permanent
and constant.
Pleas tried all kinds of medicines and underwent surgery several times, to
no avail. Jan Pleas lived a life of constant torment, until she was
introduced to marijuana at a party. When she smoked it, according to Pleas'
attorney Don Fiedler, the severe pain in her eye subsided and "for the first
time she could make love to her husband."
Now a 37 year old mother of two teenagers, Pleas was convicted in an Iowa
District Court last August for possession of marijuana, a misdemeanor
carrying up to six months in prison, and not having a tax stamp for the
marijuana, a felony carrying up to five years.
Fiedler, who served for two years as national director of the National
Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), says that in cases
with similar convictions, defendants in this district typically are
sentenced to probation only. He has filed a motion for new trial, however,
based primarily on the fact that Judge Richardson did not instruct the jury
to consider the "medical necessity" defense Fiedler had presented. If
Richardson rejects the motion it will be appealed to the Iowa Supreme Court
after the October 11 sentencing date.
Iowa's necessity defense originated many years ago when a farmer, charged
with shooting a deer, a protected species in Iowa, claimed that the deer
would have eaten all his produce if he hadn't shot it. Since then, the
necessity defense has been expanded to include acts of man in addition to
acts of nature. Had Judge Richardson allowed the medical necessity argument
to be presented to the jury, it would have been the first test of this
defense in an Iowa courtroom.
DRCNet strongly suggests that letters sent to Judge Richardson NOT include
arguments for the legalization of marijuana; this issue is not within the
judge's purview to decide, and bombarding him with those kinds of arguments
could be counterproductive and inimical to the best interests of the
defendant. Instead, we ask that supporters express their concern to Judge
Richardson that he decided a question -- whether medical necessity existed -
- that should have been decided by a jury.
We suggest the following line of reasoning: Our understanding is that ample
evidence was available that a medical necessity existed, but the Court still
did not allow the necessity defense to be presented to the jury. The Court
cited evidence on treatments and medicines available to the patient that
were not utilized; however, Dr. Yablonski of the University of Nebraska
ophthalmology department testified that these treatments were not medically
viable. How then can they be legally viable? At least shouldn't a jury
decide this question? Richardson's refusal to allow this testimony and
instruct the jury to decide whether necessity truly existed violated the
defendant's right to a trial by a jury of her peers. Instead, Judge
Richardson became the jury; Richardson should therefore allow Pleas' motion
for a new trial.
Above all, PLEASE BE RESPECTFUL. Jan Pleas' life is in Judge Richardson's
hands, and the last thing we want to do is anger him. Send your letters to:
Judge James Richardson
Pottawattamie County Courthouse
227 South 6th St.
Council Bluffs, IA 51501
You could also send letters to the local media:
Daily NonPareil
117 Pearl St.
Council Bluffs, IA 51501
TIMETABLE: Letters need to get to Judge Richardson by Oct 7 or 8.
DRCNet thanks Iowa NORML for information on this case.
Drug Reform Coordination Network, P.O. Box 381813, Cambridge, MA 02238-1813
(617) 648-2655 / (617) 646-0657 (temporary fax#) / email: drcnet@netcom.com
============================================================================
Peace Justice Freedom Compassion Truth
============================================================================
\\\\\\\\\\ //////////
END THE DRUG WAR
////////// \\\\\\\\\\
