Source: Los Angeles Times
Contact: letters@latimes.com

ROBERT A. JONES / Reefer Madness, Etcetera
On "Cheers," Woody Harrelson played a bartender so stupid he probably
thought bail was something you did with a bucket. So when Woody
Harrelsontherealperson offered to post $500,000 in bail for
marijuana activist Todd McCormick, it sort of figured that
prosecutors wanted to call Harrelson at his movie set in Australia
and make sure he was clear on the concept. In the same way, it
somehow figures that McCormick would grow his 4,000 plants, not in a
desert hideout, but in a stucco castle right smack in the middle of
BelAir. I mean, if my mapofthestars is correct, one of his
neighbors is Barry Manilow. And was anyone surprised that McCormick
appeared to have an entourage living in the castlejust like Eddie
Murphy!to take care of watering and stuff? The whole affair has
that ludicrous quality infusing so much of public life in Los
Angeles. One day Gloria Allred trots out an aggrieved single mom who
claims she was knocked up by some guy in India who ran for prime
minister. Or was it Pakistan? Anyway, Gloria says she's gonna sue,
and we eat it up. A couple of days later Allred trots out a jilted
model who blubbers for the cameras while Allred announces a lawsuit
against the jilter, one Dodi al Fayed, now rumored to be putting the
smooches on Princess Di. And I'm not even gonna mention the snake
that ate the Chihuahua.

* * *
*
The quality of public life in L.A. is hardly a new story, of course.
But the relentless junkingup of events tends to hide, on occasion,
the parts of a story that actually mean something. It's as if Los
Angeles sees everything that happens here as cultural garbage, good
only for a laugh.
Who would guess, for example, that the prosecution of
marijuana guru McCormick may represent a willful decision by the
state and the feds to pass up a chance to clarify one of the most
importantand ambiguousdrug laws in recent U.S. history.
That appears to be the case, though you'd never know from all
the Woody bulletins. The law, of course, is California's big, bad
marijuana initiative.
Why would the authorities do this? A good question, and we'll
get to that.
The McCormick case looms large because of its flagrant nature.
The kid raised so many plants the place looked like an Armstrong's,
with some pots in full view of passersby. McCormick claims that
the entire stash was for his own use or research, not for sale, and
apparently the police have found no evidence to suggest otherwise.
Couple this with McCormick's goldplated credentialsa cancer
victim, a serious student of marijuana genetics, a user operating
under advice of his doctorsand you get to the central questions of
the case:
* How far can a qualified user go in cultivating marijuana under
our new state laws? Is 4,000 plants too much? How 'bout 1,000?
* Can plants be raised for research?
Etcetera. Keep in mind that the marijuana initiative sets no limits
on cultivation and addresses no side issues such as research.
* * *
*
But as it stands, the McCormick case will never answer these
questions. That's because the Sheriff's Department and the U.S.
Justice Department decided to pull a gotcha on McCormick. They
prosecuted him under federal law rather than state law, and there
the case rests.
The gotcha has great advantages for elected officials like Sheriff
Block and D.A. Garcetti. They avoid the possibility of losing the
case and looking like fools. They may also see advantages in not
resolving the questions hanging over the marijuana initiative. It
means they can keep prosecuting cases selectively and keep their
bona fides as drug warriors.
But for the rest of us, the cost is significant. Legitimate medicinal
users all over the state will continue to operate under the threat of
arrest and prosecution. No one will know precisely what is allowed
and what is not.
And ambiguity in criminal matters always serves as an invitation
to the scumbags of the world. One way or another, they will find
advantage in our state of uncertainty.
There is a way to rescue the case. The feds could decline to
indict McCormickthus far he's only been served with a criminal
complaintand, thereby, revert the case to the state.
Most likely they won't, though. There's been little awareness of
the role the case could play, and thus little pressure to reverse the
gotcha.
But who can blame us? We've been busy. There's been Gloria
and the hungry snakes and, hey, I've been told that tomorrow this
sheik is gonna run down Hollywood Boulevard and . . .

Copyright Los Angeles Times