JURY IS CHOSEN IN TESTY POT TRIAL

Potential Members Are Shuttled To Court To Prevent Exposure To Demonstrators.

Sparks continued to fly Wednesday over whether marijuana defendant Bryan
James Epis is tampering with his trial jury through street advocacy by
demonstrators outside Sacramento's federal courthouse.

A jury of eight women and four men was finally selected after a daylong
process, but prosecutors claim that, unless extraordinary measures are
employed, the panel will be tainted by demonstrators' signs decrying the
10-year minimum prison term Epis faces if convicted.

Other signs displayed by activists on the sidewalk across Fifth Street from
the courthouse target what is described as federal "trampling" of medical
marijuana laws and states' rights.

The trial has erupted into a battle between advocates of California's
initiative-driven law allowing medical use of marijuana on a doctor's
recommendation and officials who enforce the federal ban on pot for any
purpose.

Epis, 35, was a founder of and supplier for Chico Medical Marijuana
Caregivers. He is charged with conspiring to manufacture at least 1,000
plants and manufacturing at least 100 plants -- all within 1,000 feet of
Chico Senior High School.

Epis claims he never profited from pot and only provided it to seriously
ill patients who had a doctor's recommendation.

His is the first federal criminal case involving a cannabis buyers' club to
go to trial. But U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. has ruled that,
in conformance with a recent U.S. Supreme Court opinion, Epis will not be
able to present medical-necessity evidence.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Samuel Wong scoffs at Epis' health-care
contentions, saying Epis was growing marijuana before the 1996 California
initiative and aspired to reap huge profits as a major distributor.

After the jury was dismissed Wednesday, Wong called on Damrell to "put an
end" to the signs noting the potential sentence. Both Wong and Assistant
U.S. Attorney Kenneth Melikian argued that sentencing is not an issue for
the jury, only guilt or innocence, and it is illegal to expose the panel to
the subject.

Melikian cited a statute that makes it a crime to "impede the
administration of justice" by attempting to influence jurors, and insisted:
"It is almost impossible not to see these signs if you're walking up to the
courthouse."

Damrell said he would have jurors meet where they park and would have them
brought to the building in a van.

What irked Damrell the most was the prosecutors' news of a message posted
on Epis' Web site after a confrontation between the judge and defense
attorney J. Tony Serra over Epis' role, if any, in Monday's dissemination
of literature about the case to prospective jurors as they entered the
courthouse. Damrell disqualified all 42 of those prospective jurors after
determining that Epis had handed some a statement and a pamphlet advising
them of their rights and options as jurors.

The judge also ordered an investigation of whether Epis was involved in the
literature's dissemination and scheduled a post-trial hearing on the matter.

Melikian and Wong produced an Epis Internet message requesting that
demonstrators not hand out the literature on Wednesday -- when a new group
of would-be jurors would arrive -- and asking demonstrators to conduct
themselves in a "respectful" manner. The message went on to say, however,
that there would be picketing Wednesday and "picket signs will be available."

Damrell stopped short of issuing a formal order regarding the signs, but
told Serra and Epis he would hold them both accountable if the jury was
tainted by continued demonstrations.

"It appears your client has a lot to do with what's going on outside the
courthouse," the judge told Serra. "Do you think he could have them knock
off the signs while he's giving orders?"

Serra responded that Epis was simply trying to clarify Damrell's directives
on Monday.

To avoid a repeat of Monday's problems, Damrell had the 66 new prospective
jurors report Wednesday morning to an undisclosed location, from which they
were shuttled to and from the courthouse.

When Serra learned of that, he objected vigorously to the judge, saying the
action was taken without his knowledge and that it suggested the jurors
were somehow at risk in connection with the case.

"It's unprecedented and, in the wake of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, it
creates an unacceptable environment of tension and fear," Serra argued. He
unsuccessfully asked that Damrell again disqualify the panel.

For his part, Wong attacked an article in The Bee on Tuesday about Monday's
events as containing "a number of factual inaccuracies" and being "negative
to the government," and he asked the judge to issue a gag order against the
parties and attorneys that would prevent them from communicating with
reporters.

At the end of the day, Damrell said he doesn't believe "there has been
enough of a showing to impose a gag order, at least not at this time."

Opening statements by the attorneys are scheduled for today.