ANOTHER DRUG WAR VICTIM

Perhaps the word "murder" is too strong.

But there is little question that author and publisher Peter
McWilliams died in large part because of an overdose of government --
one that could have been ameliorated by several specific people at
specific times during the process of his interaction with what some
call the justice system.

His early death at the age of 50 was morally attributable -- whether
or not it would be appropriate or useful to have formal charges filed
or not -- to the federal government, War on Drugs branch.

By the time he contracted AIDS in 1996 Peter McWilliams had had a
varied and mostly successful career as a writer and publisher.

Beginning with how-to books on personal computing in the late 1970s
through "How to Survive the Loss of a Love" and "Life 101" and "Life
102," he had about a half dozen books on the New York Times bestseller
list at various times.

His magisterial "Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do" was an eloquent
and masterfully documented plea for an end to laws against actions
that harm nobody but the person who does them.

When he was diagnosed with AIDS and non-Hodgkins lymphoma in March
1996, he hadn't smoked marijuana in years, though he had long been in
favor of ending criminal penalties against those who did. But he had
heard and read that marijuana seemed to control the nausea that in
most patients follows standard medical treatments for AIDS and cancer.

He tried it, then became an active campaigner for Proposition 215,
then on the California ballot.

When California voters approved Prop. 215, which allows patients with
a recommendation from a licensed physician to be exempt from state
laws against the use, possession and cultivation of marijuana, Peter
got two of his doctors to issue him recommendations. Having seen
beneficial results -- and having seen a federal judge issue an
injunction against the federal government not to carry out "drug czar"
Gen. Barry McCaffrey's bullying threat to arrest doctors who wrote
recommendations and rescind their federal license to prescribe
controlled substances -- they were happy to do so.

With state law authorizing the treatment that he found most effective
and with the wherewithal to grow it at home, Peter McWilliams might
have been home free. But he wanted, as was his wont, to do more. So he
made an arrangement with another patient, Tod McCormick, for Tod to
grow different strains of marijuana, experiment to determine the
effects of different strains and different dosages on different
diseases, and write a book about the results.

If marijuana, after more than 60 years of federal prohibition, was
going to become a medicine again (it was the most-prescribed drug, by
some accounts, by American doctors during the 19th century after being
rediscovered by British doctors in India), Peter wanted to play a part
in developing systematic, scientific evidence about its medicinal
properties. Peter gave Tod a large advance so he could rent a large,
old and largely gutted house in Bel Air as a greenhouse.

But although their activities were perfectly legitimate under state
law and neither state nor local law enforcement officials bothered
them, Tod and Peter came to the attention of federal officials.

First Tod was arrested and charged with cultivation for sale as the
"Bel Air Mansion Pot Grower." Peter defended Tod, and eventually began
to explain that he had financed the growing operation as part of a
research program for a book. For his trouble and honesty, he was
arrested on Dec. 17, 1997, as a "drug kingpin," and federal agents
confiscated a wide array of his property, including his computers, one
of whose hard disks contained the book he was writing at the time.
More complete information on all aspects of the case is still up at
Petertrial.com.

His financial situation at that point was nowhere near as strong as it
had been at various times in his life. His mother and brother had to
mortgage their homes to make his bail. One of the conditions of bail
was that he not smoke marijuana.

Federal Judge George King would not even entertain a medical-necessity
argument.

Since his loved ones' homes were at stake, Peter abided by the order.

But he paid a heavy price.

His viral load at the time of his arrest was down to undetectable
levels.

By November 1998 his viral load had soared to more than 256,000. In
1996, when he had developed the AIDS-related cancer, the viral load
had been only 12,500. The government continued to administer urine
tests.

Unable to work because of the disease and the toll taken by the court
battle, he was forced into bankruptcy.

He did develop various regimens, including prolonged bed rest and
frequent soothing baths, that enabled him to keep his medications down
for as long as an hour and a quarter.

His viral load came down, but he was considerably weakened and
wheelchair-bound most of the time. Still, he looked forward to going
to court, presenting the information about his use of medical
marijuana to a jury, being vindicated, and striking a blow for freedom.

Last November, however, Judge King ruled that at the trial no
information would be allowed to be presented to a jury about his
illnesses, about the fact that the government's own research (most
recently summarized in the March 1999 Institute of Medicine Report
commissioned by the drug czar) showed that marijuana was efficacious
in the treatment of the diseases, or even that California had a law
that authorized certified patients to grow and use marijuana. It was
to be a pot-growing case under federal law, plain and simple, with
Peter cast in the role of financier and kingpin.

It is likely that this outrageous decision would have been overturned
on appeal, especially since the Ninth Circuit federal appeals court
had ruled in September that lower federal courts must be open to
medical-necessity pleas even under federal law. But Peter and Tod were
almost out of resources and very sick. They took a plea bargain.

Peter hoped his incarceration could be served under house arrest,
especially since there would be no way he could stick to the strict
regimen that was permitting him to keep his medicine down (in the
absence of the ability to use a medication proven effective as an
anti-emetic) while in prison.

A prison sentence would have amounted to a death sentence.

On Sunday, June 11 there was a fire in his home that destroyed his
computers, including the book he had been writing about his ordeal
that he had wanted to be his last salvo against the marijuana laws. He
was depressed, and wouldn't talk to anybody for several days. The
following Wednesday, he choked on his own vomit in his bathroom.

If he had been allowed to use marijuana he would almost certainly have
been able to control the nausea that led to his death. Through all of
this, Peter retained a remarkably cheerful and optimistic outlook. He
never succumbed to hate, and in the e-mail messages he was still able
to send and receive prolifically, he often reminded his friends and
supporters not to give in to the desire to seek vengeance. "My enemy
is ignorance," he would say, "not individuals." During the dozens of
phone conversations I had with him during the last couple of years he
never once sounded as if he were complaining or seeking sympathy.

His health situation was what it was, and the only thing was to
understand it, accept it, deal with it, and try to take some positive
steps in the direction of a freer society, so that others would not
have to undergo what he had.

Peter McWilliams may have managed somehow to maintain a positive
outlook and never to give up until the end. But while celebrating his
life as, on balance, a joyful adventure on the road to a freer and
more open society, it is important to remember that what the federal
government did to Peter McWilliams was not just foolish and
shortsighted but evil. I don't know any other way to characterize a
stubborn determination to prohibit very ill people from using a
medication that helps them and has not killed a single person in
thousands of years of use.

I don't know if Judge King knows better, but I am utterly convinced
that Barry McCaffrey and dozens of other drug warriors do, because
they are forced to admit that the risk of medicinal use of marijuana
to the patient is close to zero -- when confronted by a questioner who
actually knows something.

Yet they continue their cruel policy on the medicinal use of
marijuana, despite the evidence, despite the fact that the people (and
the Hawaii legislature and governor on the day Peter McWilliams died)
endorse medical marijuana whenever asked or given the chance to vote.

What kind of arrogant oligarchy is capable of such cruelty -- and of
such determination to ignore the wishes of the people to whom (in
either a republic or a democracy) they are supposed to be beholden?