cannabisnews.com: Judge Bars Medical Need, Prop. 215 as Defense Judge Bars Medical Need, Prop. 215 as Defense Posted by FoM on November 06, 1999 at 07:58:52 PT By Associated Press Source: LA Times A federal judge ruled Friday that two medical marijuana activists cannot use necessity as a defense in their upcoming drug trial. They also cannot refer to their medical conditions, the medical uses of marijuana or California's Proposition 215, which allowed the personal use of marijuana for medical purposes, said U.S. District Judge George King. Todd McCormick, who has bone cancer, and Peter McWilliams, who has AIDS and cancer in remission, are accused of growing and distributing marijuana. They were arrested after federal officials found more than 6,000 plants growing in a Bel-Air mansion and three other leased locations in Los Angeles County. McWilliams, a self-help publisher, is accused of financing the operation. McCormick and others are accused of growing the pot and trying to sell it to the Los Angeles Cannabis Buyers Club, which has dispensed the drug since Californians voted in 1996 to legalize it for medical use. They are scheduled to stand trial Nov. 16. McWilliams said he was devastated by the decision. "It's frustrating to be in a state where voters voted that I can have this medication," he said. "I am needlessly dying at the prime of my career." A spokesman for the U.S. attorney's office refused to comment beyond the judge's ruling. McWilliams said he has admitted growing marijuana for his own use. He says he can only keep down his AIDS medication by smoking marijuana and that his health has suffered since his arrest in July 1998. King's ruling disallowed a defense based on medical necessity because it "is not available as a matter of law," since Congress has ruled marijuana has no medical merit. Proposition 215 recognizes some medical benefits, but U.S. officials say state laws do not apply to federal offenses. Related Articles & Web Sites:215 NOW!http://www.215now.com/PeterTrialhttp://www.petertrial.com/ Todd McCormick's Grow Medicinehttp://growmedicine.com/Prop. 215: Three Years Later But Law Still Ignored-11/05/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3574.shtmlUphold The Law - 11/05/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3569.shtmlDrug Czar Nullifies Need For Drug Test - 11/04/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3562.shtmlMedicinal-Marijuana Activists Ask for 'Safe Place'- 11/03/99http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread3537.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #2 posted by dank on April 23, 2001 at 09:30:25 PT dank420 this is bullshit we did not ask to be here alive thank god we are but pot is not a sin so why be ashamed because we are being ticketed thrown in jail and felonies being put on our records fuck that we are not crimials and it is not a gateway drug it does not kill people tabbacco kills people why is it leagal ill tell you why the get money off of it why is alcahol leagal cause they profit off of it so whos the criminal them or me leagalize marijuana stop just trying for medical use we need to stop lieing to our selves if we the people want this leagle why cant we have it there is more of ous than them we need to make a stand if u let the nation know how we can make it leagle you let ous know and we well do it thats the only thing stopping ous we need someone to lead ous [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by observer on November 06, 1999 at 08:28:56 PT by an impartial jury? > A federal judge ruled Friday that two medical marijuana activists cannot use necessity as a defense in their upcoming drug trial. Another show-trial. Why is it that the jury itself is not allowed to decide? Why? Because if certain facts are not introduced, then the "jury" is not thought likely to side with the Federal Government? (Federal Judges that don't obey the wishes of Federal prosecutors don't get on as well as 'team players', apparently.)''No person shall be ... deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law'' (Amendment V, US Bill of Rights, which police, prosecutor and judge have supposedly sworn to uphold.)Allowing the jury to hear review the law, and letting the jury decide for itself if the law has been broken is what "due process" is all about. As usual, this unconstitutional Federal Government instead hands us a propagandistic kangaroo-court, in place of "due process of law."Amendment VI:''In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartialjury...''When the defense is pre-screened for the prosecutor and judge's veto, then "an impartial jury" is not obtained. Such pre-screenings of defense arguments to juries are unconstitutional for this reason alone.Amendment VI:'' ... to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor''When the defense "witnesses" are not allowed to mention the laws of the land, then the "trial" is unconstitutional also for this reason.Amendment VI:''... and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.''When the defense counsel is not allowed to mention the laws of the land, then the "trial" is unconstitutional yet again for this reason also.''They also cannot refer to their medical conditions, the medical uses of marijuana or California's Proposition 215, which allowed the personal use of marijuana for medicalpurposes, said U.S. District Judge George King.''There is little difference between the persecution of Todd McCormick and Peter McWilliams by the Federal Government now, than with Stalinist and Nazi show-trials earlier this century. Scapegoats must be chosen and persecuted. U.S. Constitution - Bill of Rights [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: