This press release begins by explaining the trial and conviction of Dr. Mollie Fry and Dale Schafer in California.  Dr. Fry has been helping medical marijuana patients in California by writing recommendations for the therapeutic use of the herb, and Mr. Schafer has been growing the plants and providing the buds to patients.  Let’s take a look at how our federal law enforcers view the plight of these compassionate caregivers, (and note how they always use quotation marks around “medicinal”, because in the bizarro world of the DEA, a plant found to be medicinal by the American College of Physicians and the Institutes of Medicine and twelve US states isn’t medicinal):

News from DEA, Domestic Field Divisions, San Franciso News Releases, 03/20/08
These recommendations enabled the holder to avoid arrest under California’s “medicinal” marijuana law, Proposition 215. The proposition provides a legal defense to state (not federal) criminal charges when marijuana is possessed for treatment of a serious medical condition.

Evidence introduced at trial, however, showed that FRY sold these recommendation statements to people for diagnoses such as asthma, alcoholism, and sore elbow.

California’s law allows a doctor to recommend marijuana for any condition for which he or she believes marijuana will help.  It may seem counter-intuitive, but vaporized marijuana is a bronchodialator that helps some asthmatics, it can definitely help as an analgesic for a chronically sore elbow, and yours truly will testify that without marijuana, I’d have been in some severe trouble with the alcoholism of my youth.

This is just the DEA’s way of trying to blunt the criticism of the judge who didn’t want to hand out a five year mandatory minimum to a couple who aren’t drug lords, they’re just a compassionate pair of people who help the sick and disabled.  I wonder if they bothered to count all of the people with cancer, AIDS, MS, epilepsy, wasting syndrome, or any other serious ailment suffered by patients of Dr. Fry?

On cross-examination, SCHAFER admitted that by 2001, the couple had made approximately $750,000 to $1,000,000 selling these recommendation statements to over 5,000 customers who had visited their office in Cool.

Let’s see, Prop 215 was passed in 1996, so since 1996 – in five years – a doctor and a lawyer each made about $75,000 to $100,000 per year?  You know, that’s a lot for a podcaster like me, but in doctor and lawyer terms, that’s slumming.  Not exactly Medellin cartel / drug kingpin numbers there.

It was to these customers the defendants sold dried marijuana in plastic bags and as marijuana plants. Some of the customers testified at trial the hand-to-hand sales took place in the fire station parking lot near their office. Other customers signed up at the office for home delivery of dried marijuana or plants. The couple also employed a delivery man who drove to customers’ homes and delivered bags of marijuana and marijuana plants.

Egads!  You mean these compassionate caregivers were making it easier for some of their severely disabled to acquire their medicine, instead of forcing them to drive across the busy Southern California freeway system?

The trial exhibits included photos of SCHAFER and the couple’s minor children harvesting marijuana plants from this garden area and “trimming” marijuana bud inside the residence.

Well, it’s not a good drug war scare story without a “what about the children?” appeal.  Oh my god, the kiddies saw a pot plant!  And they touched it!  Why, they might grow up to think all the propaganda fed to them by the DEA and ONDCP about that plant are just lies!

The court released the defendants on bail pending their anticipated appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. As a condition of her release, the court prohibited Dr. FRY from directly or indirectly recommending “medicinal” marijuana.

Having met Dr. Fry, this to me is the saddest aspect of the case.  Why in the world would there need to be a gag order on Dr. Fry’s opinion on medical marijuana?  Is it because the government knows they’re on the wrong side of public opinion here?  Why does she lose her free speech right and her right as a doctor to recommend treatment simply because she was caught with a federally controlled substance?  Crack is federally controlled, but nobody sentences crackheads to never talk about how great crack is, and it’s not even a medicine.

[Updated from previous post -- "R"R]

News – Pair get prison in pot case – sacbee.com
An El Dorado County couple – a physician and an attorney – were sentenced Wednesday in Sacramento federal court to five years in prison for conspiring to grow and distribute marijuana.

U.S. District Judge Frank C. Damrell Jr. said federal law left him with no choice but to impose on both Dr. Marion “Mollie” Fry and attorney Dale Schafer the mandatory minimum sentence.

But, to the delight of supporters who packed the courtroom, the judge allowed the pair to remain free on bail until their appeals have been decided.

The statutory minimum applied because of the number of plants – at least 100 – found by a jury in August to be the crux of a conspiracy to grow and distribute pot from their offices in Cool and their home in Greenwood.

Were it left up to him, the judge said, the punishment would be less. “It is a sad day, a terrible day,” he said.

At the conclusion of a grueling, emotional hearing, Damrell ruled the couple could remain free on $25,000 bail each pending the outcome of their appeals.

Mandatory minimum sentencing seems to me to be against the intent of the Framers of our Constitution. They wanted a government with checks and balances – Congress makes laws, but the President can check that with a veto. Presidents can sign laws, but courts can check that against constitutionality. But to take away the discretion of the judge to impose a sentence she feels is appropriate to the facts and circumstances of the case, and instead vest that authority in the statutes passed by Congress and signed by the President, makes the judge merely a rubber stamp for the judgment-free minimums passed by a Congress trying to appear to be “tough on crime”. (Visit Families Against Mandatory Minimums for more info.)

But there is one last check – the jury. Juries have the right of nullification – they can check any bad law by simply refusing to convict, regardless of the facts, evidence, or circumstances. A jury can simply say, “We refuse to convict this couple because the law itself is unjust,” even if they were caught growing a billion marijuana plants. Learn more about jury nullification at the Fully Informed Jury Association.

Medical Marijuana Activists Get 5 Years Each – KCRA 3 News Story – KQCA Sacramento
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — An El Dorado County couple were sentenced to five years in federal prison Wednesday for growing and selling marijuana, U.S. Attorney McGregor Scott said.

Dr. Marion “Mollie” Fry, and her husband, Dale Schafer, were convicted in August.

Fry and Schafer were charged with growing and selling in their hometown of Cool.

They claim they were acting under state law.

Schafer said his wife was targeted by the federal government after she prescribed marijuana to patients under the Compassionate Use Act of 1996.

Fry, who was diagnosed with breast cancer, said she used marijuana to treat the side effects that were a result of her chemotherapy sessions.

Keep in mind that during these federal trials, defendants are forbidden from even saying the words “medical marijuana”.  They are not allowed to present the evidence of their medical needs, their patients’ medical needs, or the fact that they were dutifully following the laws of California.  This is a travesty of justice.