Politics: The Ceaseless Argument Over Who Gets To Do What To Whom, For How
Long, And Against What Degree Of Dissent.

PROSECUTOR WANTS TO JAIL QUADRIPLEGIC

Last July, Sioux Falls police arrested quadriplegic Matthew Ducheneaux at a
concert in Yankton Trail Park when he lit a joint. Ducheneaux said he was
using the marijuana as medicine, and produced a note written on a medical
prescription sheet by Sioux Falls physician Robert Seidel: "Matthew is a
quadriplegic. He uses marijuana for muscle spasms caused by his paralysis."

Sixteen years ago, Ducheneaux broke his neck in a car wreck. He can speak
well and make facial expressions. Aside from that, the only intentional
movement he can make is with a couple of fingers on his right hand. He
functions with the aid of friends and some pretty amazing technology.

"Spastic paralysis syndrome" is common among the paralyzed. The
nearly-completely severed spinal cord sends erratic messages to numb
muscles, which then sometimes contract so violently that they dislocate
joints and tear muscles. For Matthew, as for thousands of other "'plegics",
smoking cannabis -- marijuana -- makes the tremors stop almost instantly.
No one denies this.

After his 1985 accident, Ducheneaux was prescribed prescription drugs, like
valium, which stops the tremors. Valium has side effects; stupor, hair
loss, and liver toxicity. Other drugs effective for spastic paralysis are
even more toxic. No one denies this.

He learned of the therapeutic value of cannabis. Cannabis stops the tremors
and makes him feel better. Cannabis has no known toxicity. It doesn't make
one's hair fall out. To the degree Matthew Ducheneaux can function in
society with his paralysis, cannabis is an aid. Almost no one denies this.

Three medical cannabis users testified to South Dakota legislative
committees less than two months ago about their personal knowledge of
cannabis' ability to reduce nausea from cancer radiation therapy, reduce
general pain due to a dislocated spine, and reduce anxiety and seizures
associated with post-traumatic stress syndrome.

A credible poll of South Dakota voters in January found that 81per cent
believe that South Dakota law should reflect the obvious common sense in
allowing sick, disabled and dying people -- under a doctor's recommendation
-- to use whatever medicine works for them, including marijuana. 95 per
cent said that medical cannabis users should not be jailed for such use. A
just-released poll in New Mexico, commissioned by the Lindesmith Center,
found remarkably-similar results.

In 1988, Matthew Ducheneaux applied to the Drug Enforcement Agency for
consideration as a "compassionate use" exemption from government's official
position that "marijuana has no known medical use". That program currently
supplies 300 government-grown joints per month to each of eight patients in
the U.S. He was accepted, on the condition that he find a local pharmacy to
store and dispense the cannabis.

The DEA required that the pharmacy provide a 24-hour armed guard for its
cannabis, which would be stored in a safe alongside the pharmacy's drawers
full of methamphetamine, quaaludes, demerol, cocaine, and morphine (which
do not require an armed guard). Sioux Falls pharmacists all declined the honor.

All legal common-sense avenues closed, Ducheneaux provided for the day when
he'd be busted. He found a compassionate, sensible, knowledgeable and
courageous family physician who would at least some slight cover -- a note
that he was aware of Matthew's use and implicitly agreed with it. An
outright "prescription" by a doctor for marijuana is illegal.

In just the past five years, voters in eight states have approved medical
marijuana use issues on their ballots. Last June, Hawaii approved medical
cannabis legislatively.

Knowing all this, Minnehaha County Prosecutor Dave Nelson continues to
attempt to punish Matthew for trying to feel better.

We ache for superlatives to characterize the absurdity of this situation. I
found the word "absurd" in my thesaurus:

Nouns: absurdity; imbecility, nonsense, inconsistency, insanity, fatuity,
stupidity, asininity, ludicrousness, ridiculousness, ridiculosity,
comicality, blunder, muddle, bull, Irish bull, sophism, bathos, letdown,
travesty, parody, caricature, lampoonery, foolery, buffoonery, mummery,
monkey trick, monkey shine, moonshine, doubletalk, twaddle, gibberish,
fustian, empty talk, poppycock, stuff and nonsense, folly, rashness,
irrationality, paradox (see CONCEALMENT).

Verbs: be absurd; play the fool, talk nonsense, talk through one's hat, go
from the sublime to the riduculous, make a fool of (oneself), burlesque.

Adjectives: absurd; nonsensical, preposterous, senseless, inconsistent,
incongruous, ridiculous, foolish, silly, without rhyme or reason, farcical,
ludicrous, asinine, inane, stupid, screwy; unintelligible, confused.

Pick any number of the synonyms, string them together, and you may arrive
at a temporarily satisfactory summary of current government drug policy.
But perhaps the most revealing tack is to do as the thesaurus suggests,
"see concealment".

Nouns: concealment: smoke screen, masquerade, cloak, veil, lie, misprision,
underhand dealing, gobbledygook, doubletalk, (to mention a few).

Verbs: conceal: hide, secrete, lock up, bottle up, cover, screen, draw the
veil, mask, camouflage, muffle, smother, suppress, stifle, withhold,
bamboozle, skulk, slink, hoodwink (and more).

Now, we're getting somewhere. These are the true synonyms for government
policy with respect to prohibition of some consciousness-altering
substances (as opposed to the sanction and promotion of some others).

In a newspaper story about Ducheneaux last August, term-limited
Representative Roger Hunt said, "There is not any pharmaceutical marijuana
at this time. There have been studies showing smoking marijuana is harmful.
Also, marijuana is addictive like tobacco, and then we have to say we have
a model, the tobacco industry. That is an area we don't want to get
involved with."

"Legislation allowing medicinal marijuana use in other states is so full of
loopholes, it prevents law enforcement from making arrests for any kind of
pot use," Hunt said. "If we're talking of marijuana for medical purposes,
someone is blowing smoke at us."

Hunt's statements use the typical government gobbledygook to screen and
smother the real isues. This smarmy little tick was instrumental in forming
state criminal statutes and punishment codes for eight years in Pierre. God
bless term limits.

The thing about ticks, though, is that there are always more. Dean Krogman
lobbies for the South Dakota State Medical Association (state affiliate of
the AMA) at the legislature. Doneen Hollingsworth is So. Dak. Secretary of
Health. Both told legislative committees in January that there were
FDA-approved drugs (produced by major pharmaceutical companies) which were
better and safer than cannabis for any of the wide range of syndromes for
which cannabis has been shown to be of benefit.

Well, let's examine that. FDA-approved drugs, administered by FDA-approved
doctors, kill about 120,000 people per year because of unexpected
side-effects or unexpected synergistic conflicts with other FDA-approved
drugs. Marijuana kills no one. Never has. In 1937, the AMA's lobbyist
opposed the proposed (and subsequently enacted) prohibitive tax on
marijuana in Congress. One of the reasons some physicians feel comfortable
with suggesting cannabis to some folks is that -- while it doesn't work for
everyone with similar syndromes or illnesses -- if it doesn't work, it at
least doesn't cause any harm.

Current House Speaker Scott Eccarius of Rapid City, an eye surgeon, seems
to be vying for Hunt's record of inanity: "Drugs already available are more
effective than marijuana (for glaucoma, one of the conditions for which
cannabis is beneficial). To treat glaucoma with marijuana, he said in
January, "You'd literally have to be stoned all the time."

Eccarius also said he was worried that legalizing marijuana or hemp would
be a "Trojan horse" that would lead to general legalization of marijuana.
"I'm opposed to it," he said.

Eccarius didn't mention whether, if he had glaucoma, he'd rather be
"stoned" or blind. As for his worry about general legalization of
marijuana, well, does common sense have any place in this discussion? Is
Eccarius saying that God provided us an unspeakably dangerous herb with
absolutely no benefits? Or is he saying that any investigation into the
suggestion that the herb does, indeed, have benefits, might lead to our
knowledge that the herb does, indeed, have benefits?

The fact is that cannabis, used therapeutically, approximates the results
of a wide array of prescription remedies. It's cheaper -- even at
black-market prices -- than most prescription drugs (see "concealment"). It
has almost no harmful effects. Its worst known side-effect is a temporary
sense of well-being, or euphoria, unsettling to some people who aren't used
to it. And that seems to be why government hates it. A drug which makes one
feel better seems to be okay with government if it doesn't actually make
one feel better (see "absurd").

Francis L. Young, a DEA Administrative Law Judge, said in a 60-page opinion
on the subject in 1988: "Marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the
safest therapeutically active substances known to man. It would be
unreasonable, arbitrary and capricious for the DEA to continue to stand
between those sufferers and the benefits of this substance in light of the
evidence in this record."

On the other hand, Prosecutor Nelson, former-Representative Hunt, and
Speaker Eccarius amply demonstrate the harmful effects of marijuana.
They've been driven senseless, inconsistent, incongruous, ridiculous,
foolish, silly, farcical, ludicrous, asinine, inane, stupid, screwy,
unintelligible, and confused by it. And one would presume they don't even
smoke it.

There is one note of encouragement on the Ducheneaux case as Tempest goes
to press. On March 8, Sioux Falls Magistrate Patricia Riepel seemed
disposed to grant a defense motion to allow a "greater necessity" defense
strategy to Matthew. Essentially, this will allow Matthew and medical
experts to testify that the use of marijuana, in this instance, prevents a
greater harm. Her opinion will be released about the time this issue of
Tempest hits the streets. If the defense can present the jury with the
facts at his trial in June, Matthew will be acquitted. Then, we taxpayers
will simply be left with a bill for a case which never should have been
prosecuted.

See more about Matthew Ducheneaux at http://www.sodaknorml.org/. Bob
Newland's journey is published at http://www.nakedgov.com/.