cannabisnews.com: Judge Weighs Pot-Trial Gag Judge Weighs Pot-Trial Gag Posted by CN Staff on January 23, 2003 at 15:24:14 PT By J.K. Dineen of The Examiner Staff Source: San Francisco Examiner The drug cultivation trial of medicinal marijuana guru Ed Rosenthal turned into a free speech battle Wednesday when the presiding judge said he was inclined to sign a media gag order and defense attorneys vowed to fight any such order. The rift emerged after Assistant U.S. Attorney George Bevan Jr. complained about news coverage of the trial, which began Tuesday in federal court. In particular, Bevan said he was upset about Wednesday's Examiner cover, which showed a photograph of Rosenthal smiling and hugging his 12-year-old daughter, Justine. The story's headline was, "My dad's a hero.'' Rosenthal, charged with marijuana cultivation and conspiracy and facing possible life in prison if convicted, addressed reporters after adjournment Tuesday and Wednesday. After Bevan's complaint, U.S. District Court Judge Charles Breyer asked the prosecutor to compose a gag order, which the U.S. Attorney's Office was still drafting Wednesday afternoon, according to spokeswoman Debbie Young. The judge said he was reluctant to limit free speech but may be willing to do it in this case. "I've never before imposed a gag order in a case, and I'm always loath to do so, but if a party to the case is giving press interviews during a trial, that's cause for concern,'' Breyer said. Defense attorney William Simpich, who said he would contest any gag order, said he doesn't believe "anyone's right to a fair trial is being compromised by the First Amendment." "The First Amendment counts for a lot in this country and unless free speech is compromising the trial, it shouldn't be an issue," he said. "There have not been any complaints from the jury -- the judge has instructed them to follow the law and that is what we expect them to do." As is standard practice in jury trials, Breyer has instructed jurors not to read news accounts of the case and not to discuss the case with anyone. Breyer also warned Rosenthal that his actions outside the courtroom could lead to a stiffer sentence if Rosenthal is convicted. "A defendant's conduct during the course of proceedings is a factor in sentencing," the judge said. If the judge and the prosecution hoped the threat of a gag order would muffle the cantankerous Rosenthal, they were mistaken. Rather than toning down his post-hearing commentary, the pot activist went in the other direction, attacking the judge for even considering a gag order "just because they didn't like my picture in The Examiner." "I think he should be removed from the bench for a remark like that. It shows prejudice," Rosenthal said. "His decisions aren't based on an investigation -- first he makes a decision, and then he figures out the reason why.'' Former federal prosecutor James Lassart, an attorney with Ropers Majeski Kohn and Bentley, said a gag order is sometimes needed "to protect the sanctity of the trial" in high-profile cases. "It's not a ruling that judges make lightly," said Lassart. "Judge Breyer is a fine judge and will be careful in making a ruling like that." The first amendment issue overshadowed a fairly drab day of testimony as attorneys on both sides argued over the number of "rooted" plants Drug Enforcement Administration agents confiscated during a raid on Rosenthal's Oakland warehouse, where he said he was growing marijuana for medicinal use by sick people. While medicinal marijuana has been legal in California since 1996, it is still against federal law. Throughout the trial, Breyer has told the jury not to consider the fact that the drugs were being grown for medicinal use and that it was irrelevant that the Oakland City Attorney's Office had granted Rosenthal permission to grow the pot.Source: San Francisco Examiner (CA)Author: J.K. Dineen of The Examiner Staff Published: January 23, 2003Copyright: 2003 San Francisco ExaminerContact: letters sfexaminer.comWebsite: http://www.examiner.com/Related Articles & Web Sites:Green-Aid.comhttp://www.green-aid.com Americans For Safe Access http://www.safeaccessnow.orgEd Rosenthal's Trial Pictures & Articleshttp://freedomtoexhale.com/trialpics.htmA Prejudicial Judge? - San Francisco Examinerhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15264.shtmlGag Order Draws First-Amendment Expert http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread15256.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #1 posted by overtoke on January 23, 2003 at 16:29:29 PT: Afraid? Is the judge afraid he will be influenced by truthful information?Is the judge content in being absent this knowledge when making his decisions?This is a 'simple' drug case. Does it warrant a gag order? And shouldn't this judge be immediately replaced for displaying this action?What can the states do to protect their citizens? [ Post Comment ] Post Comment