Last week, I wrote about the story of Kathy Parkins. Parkins was a 51-year-old medical marijuana patient from Washington who was arrested in late 2007 after being pulled over in Arizona with a small amount of marijuana. She was allowed to serve out her probation in Seattle, but ran into some corruption and incompetence within the Washington Department of Corruptions, including being illegally detained and kept in jail for a week in May 2008 without any charges. Following that, she spent over a year trying to get a hold of a document that showed that a corrections officer falsified information in an attempt to have her sent back to Arizona. The document was finally released in the most recent public disclosure request and contained several fabrications – things that clearly could not have been accidental.
I’d also mentioned that Carla Cole, Parkins’ roommate at the time of the arrest, had been trying to get an explanation from the DOC. In February 2009, DOC Head Eldon Vail sent Cole a reply claiming that the officers didn’t inaccurately fill out paperwork or fabricate anything. At the time, the DOC was still refusing to let Parkins actually see the report in question, an Interstate Compact form that allowed for her to serve out her probation here. So after the report was revealed in the public disclosure request – proving that, in fact, Officer Jeremy Praven made several things up – she sent off another letter to Vail asking for an explanation.
In a letter dated last Wednesday, February 10, the DOC once again tried to claim that there’s nothing to see here, although the letter did not come directly from Vail. It was from Regional Administrator Jim Harms:
I have been asked to respond to your letter dated January 24, 2010 addressed to Secretary Eldon Vail. You wrote about information contained in a public disclosure request response concerning the Washington State Department of Corrections and medical marijuana, and the circumstances of the arrest of your former tenant, Kathleen Merry in May 2008.
We take the concerns of you, and in fact, all citizens very seriously and carefully review all complaints. As Secretary Vail indicated in his February 20, 2009 letter to you, your allegations of misconduct were investigated. Both the Unit Supervisor and the Field Administrator followed up with identified staff.
I apologize for any confusion or frustration this incident caused you, but no indications of misconduct, intended inaccuracies or fabrications have been found in this case.
Once again, you can see the document in question in this PDF file of released documents, pages 20 to 22. As I documented last week, within that report, Praven makes a number of completely fictional claims:
– That Parkins has no family ties to Washington state and only came here because of the medical marijuana laws. In fact, Parkins has lived in Washington state nearly her entire life, only recently deciding to move to California. Her children and grandchild live here, along with 9 aunts and uncles.
– That Cole belongs to an organization called the ‘Marijuana’s Growers Association of Washington’. No such organization has ever existed.
– That Parkins was not authorized to use medical marijuana in Washington state. Parkins had received an updated authorization that morning. She claims that when she offered to show it to Officer Praven, he wasn’t interested in seeing it.
There simply isn’t any ambiguity about this. Anyone with rudimentary critical thinking skills can recognize that these lies showed up in Praven’s report as an attempt to have Parkins sent back to Arizona. Coupled with the fact that Praven illegally detained Parkins before filling out this document – and then left her in jail for a week without any information about why she was being held – there’s no justification at all for claiming that no misconduct occurred. And it’s a clear lie that no intended inaccuracies or fabrications ended up in Parkins’ paperwork.
Lee. I can’t help wondering how stupid these people are to get arrested for smoking pot.
I blatantly smoked pot from 1967 to 2002 and never even had anyone try to bust me.
What’s the problem with these people???
@1
About 800,000 or so people get arrested for smoking pot every year. Like you, though, I’ve never been one of those people either (although I only smoked pot from the mid-90s till this past year). Part if it is because I’m a white professional who doesn’t fit the normal profile of a pothead.
But neither does Parkins. She got caught in a border patrol checkpoint in Yuma County, Arizona. She possibly could’ve driven about 300 miles out of her way to avoid even that possibility (making sure she was always over 100 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border), but I wouldn’t say that she was stupid for not doing so. She was a bit naive in thinking that she’d be protected from arrest in Arizona (states usually don’t recognize other states medical marijuana laws – and Arizona has a law but it was poorly written and doesn’t actually protect anyone), but I don’t think she was overtly dumb in this situation.
The matter isn’t whether the arrestee was ‘dumb’, the issue is one of corruption.
It’s bad enough that this happened to anyone; it’s really bad that it happened to a person who was ill. But it’s worse when the responsible agencies arrogantly won’t own up to their failures.
That fosters a furthering of the ‘anything goes’ attitude that law enforcement has increasingly adopted over the past 20 years regarding drug law enforcement, including such practices as ‘testilying’. I consider this instance to be one more such example of that attitude in operation. An attitude that’s at variance with the ideals of democracy and accountability.
Lee,
This is sick .. on you part. You are charging COC people with intentional lying, false arrest, and corruption.
Corruption implies that someone involved is illegally benefiting. If you can not back this up you may want to talk with an attorney to find our the definition of slander.
Your other claims amount to charges of perjury and intentional falsification of evidence.
If you really think any of this is true, it seems to me YOU should file criminal charges.
Great way to discredit HA.
Lee, are you questioning Goldy’s judgement? Goldy told us to vote for Gregoire. The Governor appoints The Secretary of Corrections.
@4
Every single one of my claims is proven by the released documents. And in fact, the DOC sent a letter to Governor Gregoire’s office admitting that they illegally arrested Parkins.
Lee
There is a huge difference between a police office being in error and being malicious.
At least from what you have reported, Parkins violated the conditions of her probation. The DOC, from what you have posted, arrested her because she was in violation of probation. That appears not to have been within the authority of the officer making the arrest … not being lawful is not the same as your implication that something was done that requires legal action against the officers.
As to the inaccuracies .. eg as to whether she does or does not have family here … there is a huge difference between lying and making an unintended error.
Hardly the stuff of corruption or false arrest!
You are hurting your cause and, in my opinion, lowering the tone of HA by these sort of posts.
At least from what you have reported, Parkins violated the conditions of her probation.
No she didn’t. According to the DOC’s own internal policy, Parkins was able to apply for medical marijuana use and wouldn’t be violated during that time.
The DOC, from wahyt you have posted, arrested her because she was in violation of probation.
And as I pointed out in the original post, the Field Administrator admitted that they didn’t have grounds to arrest her and they even sent a letter to Governor Gregoire’s office admitting fault.
As to the inaccuracies .. eg as to whether she does or does not have family here … there is a huge difference between lying and making an unintended error.
There’s no question that it was an intended inaccuracy. Praven had access to her file from Arizona and simply made things up. Not to mention that even after the inaccuracies were discovered by officials in Arizona, Praven sent the same uncorrected document to Arizona several months later in a second attempt to have her sent back there.
Going back to your previous comment.
Corruption implies that someone involved is illegally benefiting.
Incorrect, here is the definition of corruption:
There’s absolutely no question whatsoever that that’s what happened here.
You are hurting your cause and, in my opinion, lowering the tone of HA by these sort of posts.
Well, when someone with a shred of credibility makes that claim, I’ll take it seriously. You’re a joke, and everyone knows you’re a joke.
My question is…
Isn’t there a means to get the “medical” benefit of Marijuana, THC, via other methods than eating pot or smoking it?
If yes, than the whole “medical marijuana” as a means towards legalization kind of falls apart for me.
I’m all for eliminating the federal laws regarding MJ use and leave it up to individual states to determine legalization. Spend the time, money, cell space etc on crime that harms society.
That said, I don’t have much sympathy for someone who has a “prescription” and doesn’t realize it’s not a “get out of jail free” card.
As to the DOC “conspiracy”?
It’s a he said she said, and we don’t know what was told at the time of arrest or detainment to corrections officials.
@9
Isn’t there a means to get the “medical” benefit of Marijuana, THC, via other methods than eating pot or smoking it?
To some extent, but it’s also necessary to keep in mind that THC is only one of the cannabinoids in marijuana, and not the only one that appears to have medicinal effects. This is why Marinol, a THC-only substitute, doesn’t work for a number of patients.
A British pharmaceutical company called GW Pharmaceuticals has developed a spray called Sativex, which uses the full range of cannabinoids in the plant, and apparently works just as well as the natural plant, but is not yet available in the United States. Once it is, the only thing that would keep people using the plant itself would be if the cost is prohibitive.
That said, I don’t have much sympathy for someone who has a “prescription” and doesn’t realize it’s not a “get out of jail free” card.
What’s difficult about this is that the laws should be clearer. If you ever talk to most patients, all they want to know is – “what’s the law, I’ll follow the law, just tell me what it is”. The problem has tended to be that law enforcement agencies don’t always follow the laws, or they have no sympathy for people who have genuine needs.
It’s a he said she said, and we don’t know what was told at the time of arrest or detainment to corrections officials.
The folks at the DOC refused to answer my questions about this, they refused to release the Interstate Compact report until they were legally forced to, and even the Arizona officials think they lied. If this were really a he said-she said situation, why aren’t they defending themselves publicly? If I’m mischaracterizing anything, they can easily slap Goldy and me with a suit.
You have some common sense, RS, it should be pretty easy to figure out who’s telling the truth here.
9 Right Stuff
Lee is hardly a reasonable source. Some of what hes says abouyt MJ are far from correct and even dangerous to some users. As one exam-le, NOONE, and certainly children should be in haling the carcinogens in MJ smoke.
Here is GW’s own description of Sativex
Nothing in their release suppoerts Lee’s idea that smoking MJ may have unquer therapeutic advantages. OTOH, there are serouos concerns that smoking MJ can cause cancer and I would be surpised if any medical authority supports reefers.
If Lee an the other potheads actually cared about sick people they would be supporting GW’s efforts to get their preparation into the American market,
Lee
Most of the literature suggests the issue is pharmacokinetics … the rate of delivery of an oral vs an inhaled compound.
AFIK there is no evidence that the beneficia effects of the other cannnabinoids imporove the anti nausea effects of THC.
Most of us in the cause know that the powers that be, ie, DOC have lied in the past and will lie in the future. There is so much information out there about medical marijuana. It is a healing plant. Period. Too bad that Lee is placed in the position to explain the truth about it over and over again to people online who just want to argue and be right. Or maybe some of these people are in fact part of the DOC defending their role in the Parkins case!
@13 Jboyd
I think you have summarized the problem.
Whatever their intent, if “the cause” feels the DOC folks are corrupt (as MOST folks use the term) or intentionally falsifying documents then you ought to file charges. So far, however, nothing Lee has said seems to rise to that level.
The other BS is the claim that marijuana is a miraculous cure all. Marijuana is no more a “healing plant” then the tree bark used original to make aspirin or taxol. For that matter is is no more a healing plant than the cacao bean. The “cause” makes this sound like a profound issue on a par with civil rights or healthcare.
Finally, if hempfest ios goping to expose kids to inhaled carcinogens next year, the fucking thing ought to be banned.
“The other BS is the claim that marijuana is a miraculous cure all. Marijuana is no more a “healing plant” then the tree bark used original to make aspirin or taxol. For that matter is is no more a healing plant than the cacao bean.”
Cannabis anti-cancer properties discovered in 1974 at University of Virginia: Munson, AE et al. Antineoplastic Activity of Cannabinoids. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Sept. 1975. p. 597-602.
Cannabis anti-cancer properties ‘discovered’ again in 1994: Toxicology and Carcinogenesis Studies of 1-Trans-Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (CAS No. 1972-08-3) in F344 Rats and B6C3F1 Mice (Gavage Studies)
and again:
Cannabis anti-cancer properties discovered yet again in Madrid, Spain, in 2000: A pilot clinical study of Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol in patients with recurrent glioblastoma multiforme
and again:
Inhibition of skin tumor growth and angiogenesis in vivo by activation of cannabinoid receptors
More to follow, since the amount of characters seems to exceed the software’s ability to accept it.
More studies:
Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) inhibits lytic replication of gamma oncogenic herpesviruses in vitro
and again:
Cannabinoids Inhibit the Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Pathway in Gliomas
Antitumor Effects of Cannabidiol, a Nonpsychoactive Cannabinoid, on Human Glioma Cell Lines
and again:
Cannabinoid Receptor as a Novel Target for the Treatment of Prostate Cancer
And. especially for those worried about inhaled carcinogens: the Tashkin Study which found no correlation between the presumed carcinogens and the action of those presumed carcinogens on lung tissue.
None. Zero, Zip. Nada. Nichivo. NONE. In fact, the study found that in instances where cannabis and tobacco were used together, the cannabis components evidently were protective of the very lung tissue that should have been damaged by tobacco usage.
Impressive, no? Warrants more research, yes? THEN WHY THE F- HASN”T IT HAPPENED? Indeed, why is it that the first two groundbreaking studies, conducted under the aegis of the NIDA for the express purpose of finding medically deleterious effects for cannabis, were effectively buried after the results didn’t match government expectations?
Something stinks here, big time…
Nemo:
If anything your posts contradict your claim and suggest that the level of research is reasonable.
1. I mentioned the Tashkin study and agree the results are interesting. However, the study most certainly did NOT find “that in instances where cannabis and tobacco were used together, the cannabis components evidently were protective of the very lung tissue that should have been damaged by tobacco usage.”
Actually given the design of that study is COULD not reach susch a conclusion. YFailing to find a result (aka not rejecting the null hypothesis) is NEVER accepted as evidence that something is safe. The reason for this has to do with the concept of correlation and “confounding variables.” The authors discuss this if you read their paper.
A confounding variable is one that the au did notmeasure that explains the correlation. As one example, a colleague of mine found the exciting result that a certain kind of blood protein correlated with atherosclerosis. This was exciting until it turned out that he had inadvertently only included Greeks in one of his groups. Repeat efforts with a better ethnic bias did not show the effect (as for the Greeks .. not sure that wa sever followd up, Ouzo??)
BTW, exactly this sort of claim was used for decades by the Tobacco companies. Many studies showed no evidence of the correlation. In that cases we now believe the result was the presence of confounding variables that protected the smokers.
2. The rest of the citations have nothing to do with the issue of whether inhaling carcinogens is safe because cannabinoids are anti cancer.
Here is an expt that only a damn fool would do .. smoke a joint through a cig. filter. Then rub the filter on your skin. The result almost likely be neoplastic. No one would do such an experiment because the risk is sky high. No Institutional Review Board would permit the study. Even doing it on mice might not be approved because the evidence implicating carcinogens is overwhelming.
3. You seem not to understand what cancer is and what it is not. Actually most cancers replicate relatively slowly. Thus the claim that a cannabinoid slows the rate of growth of a gliobastoma in a culture dish really does not mean much
Cancer is a loss of the normal mechanisms that keep cells in an organoid structure and limit the number of total times they can grow. We know that this depends on genetic chnges, that is changes in DNA. So showing that something does or does not change how fast cancer cells replicate usually is not very interesting. OTOH, showing effects on DNA structure, repair mechanisms, methylation of DNA, etsd .. all these are very important.
4. You also need to understand that even if there IS good evidence for an interesting effect, this is NOT evidence that suggests inhaling benzpyrene is safe.
Here is one good example of a paper in a major journal that supports your claim. They found that certain kinds of cancer derived from skin have both receptors for cannabinoids. In cell culture experiments and in vivo occupation of these receptors with pharmacological doses killed tumorigenic epidermal cells. This is interesting, though there are many such compounds with similar effects, the fact that they found an effect on EGF receptor is intriguing. Of course these days we have direct inhibitors for that receptor so I am not sure that drugs working this way would be of interest other than for showign new information on how EGF signals.
As for your worry that good experiments are not followed up, You might want to see if Guzman has followed up, I took a quick look and found 11 papers by him on this topic in 2008-2009,
Seems like you underestimate the system!
4. Many of the references you give are to relatively non selective journals. This does not mean there is no peer review only that the journal is willing to publish things that are less exciting than a more selective journal would publish. Here is one example from your list:
Moreover the results here are mainly to show that THC is itself NOT a carcinogen ..
National Toxicology Program
If you read this paper you will see that they actually found some unimpressive eviodence that THC might promote cancer. The one anti cancer finding was, as I suggested above, attributed to a confounding variable.
Here is another example from your list. This paper is a phase 1 study. That emasn it was NOT intended do (and did not) look for an antitumor effectr. Phase 1 studies are saferty studies and here, as in most papers dealing with Cannabinoids, there was no evidence of harm.
Bottom line:
No.
why hasn’t what happened? The opnly expt that would seem to satisy you would be a prospective study of MJ smoke vs Tobacoo smoke. That would likley NOT be allowed under our laws because of the risk to patients.
As far as I know NOONE thinks THC is toxic, that is what these studies looked for.
On this we agree (smiles)
Nemo
BTW .. tx for the effort .. I hope I have reassured you that the system DOES work,
Since the blog will scroll, I would be happy to meet and discuss this at DL some Tuesday night.