Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Congressional Malpractice

By Ryan Grim, Washington City Paper. Posted November 9, 2005.


The judge who sentenced Jonathan Magbie to jail isn't the only party complicit in his death: the U.S. Congress also played a part in this tragedy.
Advertisement

Thirteen months ago, Superior Court Judge Judith Retchin sentenced Jonathan Magbie, a 27-year-old quadriplegic, to a 10-day Washington D.C. jail sentence for marijuana possession, assuring attorneys she had checked with the jail and that it could handle someone in his condition. By the fourth day of Magbie's sentence, he was locked in a cell with no ability to communicate or call for help. His breathing tube had been improperly placed; his weight had plummeted since his arrival; his apparent pneumonia had gone untreated. That night, Sept. 24, 2004, he was taken to Greater Southeast Community Hospital, where he died.

Retchin, an investigation has since determined, had not told the jail that Magbie was a quadriplegic or that he needed a respirator to assist his breathing. Nevertheless, Retchin has not been sanctioned in any way. In fact, she was recently reappointed to the criminal docket. So far, no wrists have been slapped at the jail or at Greater Southeast Community Hospital, either, though all three parties have been thoroughly dragged across the media's coals, mostly by Washington Post op-ed columnist Colbert King.

Despite the spotlight that shines on this tragedy, one connection has so far gone unnoticed--the U.S. Congress set the stage for the entire tragedy to unfold by means of a proclamation a couple of dozen words long: "The Legalization of Marijuana for Medical Treatment Initiative of 1998, also known as Initiative 59, approved by the electors of the District of Columbia on November 3, 1998, shall not take effect."

Those words are attached to the city's annual federal allocation every year, toward the end of a long list of provisos on payments to the District, not far from restrictions on needle exchange, abortion, and promoting full congressional representation. When the U.S. Senate sent that language to conference committee Oct. 18, it all but guaranteed the ban will yet again survive at least another year.

When Magbie was 4 years old, he was struck by a car passing a stopped bus. Since then, he was unable to use either his arms or his legs. But immobility is not the only consequence of quadriplegia. Because of damage to nerves that control the diaphragm, along with extremely limited control of the body below the neck, breathing becomes difficult; hence Magbie's respirator. And with the interruption of the body's normal nerve control, quadriplegics commonly suffer from muscle spasms--think of the worst charley horse you've ever had, one that threatens to strike at any time, in any situation. Not only are the spasms frequent and extremely painful, but they can be so severe that they literally buck patients out of their wheelchairs.

Magbie's mother, Mitchellville, Md., resident Mary Scott, is not a crusader for drug-policy reforms. She says she hasn't given much thought to the legal issues surrounding the medical-marijuana debate but rather is focusing her ire on the negligence that allowed her son to die: She is now suing the city, the jail, and Greater Southeast Community Hospital. "Jonathan's needs were extensive," she says. "If they're going to take custody of people, they should be treated humanely. Jonathan was not."

One of Magbie's needs was relief from his intense spasms. The Valium he was prescribed, says Scott, wasn't enough, and so he used marijuana to relieve them. Scott says that she was aware of Magbie's marijuana use and that if it had been legal for him to obtain a prescription from a doctor for medical marijuana, she is certain he would have done so.

There is some question as to why Retchin chose to sentence Magbie -- a first-time offender who was arrested carrying only 0.39 grams of marijuana -- to jail instead of to probation. According to King's analysis, she did so largely because a loaded gun was found in the car he was riding in when he was arrested. Before the sentencing, she told Magbie it was "just unacceptable to be riding around in a car with a loaded gun in this city," even though someone else in the car claimed responsibility for the gun.

But Retchin also made clear that she based her stiff sentence on Magbie's refusal to swear off marijuana. "But Mr. Magbie," she lectured while sentencing him, according to a transcript, "this [pre-sentence] report tells me that...using marijuana makes you feel better. The Pre-sentence Report writer believes you will not stop using marijuana and you don't believe there's anything wrong with it. As long as it's against the law, you're not permitted to do it Mr. Magbie." (Through a spokesperson, Retchin declined to comment on the Magbie case.)

"Jonathan was very candid with the court reporter....That's what was picked up by the judge," says Magbie's attorney, Boniface Cobbina. "The judge based [the sentence] on future conduct." Documents also show that Cobbina raised the issue of the legitimacy of medical marijuana with Retchin prior to sentencing, but it didn't matter; Magbie was sentenced to 10 days regardless.


Digg!

Ryan Grim is an editorial intern at Washington City Paper.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
We Need Direct Action Concerning Marijuana Laws
Posted by: decembrist on Nov 9, 2005 12:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The criminalization of marijuana needs to end NOW. While we wait for congress, etc. to pull their heads from their brown button holes and see the light, people's lives are being ruined (and ended) by our legal backwardness because marijuana provides exactly the respite that they need.

Marijuana use and its criminalization is part of the larger issue of liberty and basic freedom. Nobody can argue that marijuana is more dangerous than tobacco or alcohol, or any other illegal drug, or many legal prescription drugs. I believe it's the only specter of the hippies and the sheer terror that conservatives felt during the 60s that keeps marijuana from being legalized... because criminalizing just DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

I'm going to play around with the idea of starting a group concerned with supporting those brought to INjustice by our legal system because of marijuana and with direct action focused on highlighting our country's absurd horror of the plant (mass smoke-ins at the White House fence, maybe?).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horrific
Posted by: Samantha Vimes on Nov 9, 2005 2:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That judge should be in so much trouble. The gun--? He couldn't hold a gun! WTF?!

The man was obviously innocent of anything but marijuana use, and the most lenient sentence legally possible should have been given on the basis of the obvious *intent* of local law and serious medical need.

And as for not having the jail see to his medical needs properly... there aren't words for my anger. I have asthma, I can imagine how terrifying his inability to breathe was. I'm weeping right now over this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

judicial malpractice?
Posted by: jimsenter on Nov 9, 2005 4:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
No. Not at all. Callous disregard for the welfare of people accused of crimes? Lying to the public about her actions? Vindictive punishment without restraint or sense? This proves that Judge Retchin has the temperment to be a Supreme Court Judge. Give that woman an appointment!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: judicial malpractice? Posted by: Lincoln fan
When will they ever learn?
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Nov 9, 2005 4:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Prohibition of alcohol in th 20's was a bad idea. It only took the government about 15 years to discover that it was a bad idea. The prohibition of marijuana is even worse. Ingestion of alcohol has no known medicinal value. The taxpayers money spent to enforce these laws and house the criminals could certainly be put to better use. If marijuana were to be controlled as alcohol is, it would put money into the treasury instead of draining it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: When will they ever learn? Posted by: John Rice
» RE: When will they ever learn? Posted by: Lincoln fan
robflam
Posted by: robflam on Nov 9, 2005 7:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the Christian Right
What would Jesus Say

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: robflam Posted by: chinasdad
SHAME ON THE MURDERERS!
Posted by: Ullern on Nov 9, 2005 8:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shame, shame, shame on them!

Death-sentence for 0.39 g pot - how unreal is this drug-hunt going to get?

The guy predictably died from that ban on his most effective medicine.

No one has ever died from Cannabis, but this man died from the punishment for using it.

Cannabis is harmful only if you get caught and punished.

But the threat of punishment is also harming, making Cannabis-use - which is impossible to eradicate - less positive than it might be.

How unreal should we allow the law to make us feel?

Shame, shame, shame on the manipulators.

Newsweek 24. Oct. 2005: "I have no doubt that what we are doing on the war on drugs is not working," says one U.S. senator. "But I also have noe doubt that if I say it and come out in favor of legalizing some drugs ... I will lose my next election."

The pot-ban is not about pot anymore - if it ever was.

The pot-ban is about retaining a power over people by creating conflict over a common, popular past-time.

Ole Ullern

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CREATION....the third day
Posted by: picket on Nov 9, 2005 8:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Let there be.......plants bearing seed according to their kinds.....And God saw that it was good." Genesis 1.12-13
"We then, that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak." Many people saw what society was doing to torture Jonathan.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Drug Warriors - Horrible Human Beings
Posted by: BMaxwell on Nov 9, 2005 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What is it that makes the government as a whole so fearful and hostile to marijuana? It simply doesn't make sense and flies in the face of reason and fact. I think perhaps it has something to do with the fact that many people in the government come from the elite of society and so don't interact at all with drugs or drug users and instead buy into the horrible stereotypes put out by the anti-drug crusaders. The whole government is infected with a disease that does not allow it to act rationally. The people in government seem to often lack some of the best qualities of humanity - compassion and reason. Though this story is sickening, many, many more stories of gross injustice from the front lines of the "drug war" can be found.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More Control From Government
Posted by: nise52 on Nov 9, 2005 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just another example of a few controlling the many. Legalize pot and tax it like they do gasoline and cigarettes! And tell the Puritan police to get off people's backs!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You're all kidding - right?
Posted by: Bic Pentameter on Nov 9, 2005 8:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Legalize or decriminalize marijuana? Tolerate it for medicinal use? Maybe the aerosol spray that bears no resemblance to actual marijuana.

The hippies may have re-kindled a certain self-righteous hypocrisy, but the big lie was first floated long before that. And - as usual - it was done to protect the profitability of an industry that simply couldn't continue to rake in easy money in the face of competition.

During WWI we discovered that hemp produced longer, stronger, faster-growing fibers than cotton, was not subject to attack by boll weevils or any other natural pestilence, usually requires little or no fertilization, and had no need of intensive labor to pick & harvest.

So why not just grow the stuff? Mean-spirited greed, big egos, lies upon lies, and the relative positions of the persons involved. In other words, the same political climate we have today, except perhaps for a few minor details.

Throughout the war, the cotton kings felt compelled to fabricate reasons for the government to use only their product and meet their higher prices. There had to be something wrong with hemp - there just had to be. And the real problem had to be hushed up with a vengeance. It had more to do with the relative positions of the personalities involved.

Cotton was big business, and had been long enough to accumulate a heirarchy of wealthy persons addicted to big money. And all of their friends, families, congressmen, local labor enforcers plus a whole slew of other people who were making a lot more than the people that actually handled the stuff. How could it be fair to allow some upstarts - with no staggering overhead to meet - come along and offer a superior product for little more than the actual cost of producing it?

So the lines were drawn, and the lies were told and then sworn to. More lies were added to back up the first few layers. Resentments festered. No textile tycoon would ever tolerate an honest discussion about the great threat to his own wealth. Fillin' up the corncob pipe wasn't even an issue at the time. It hadn't yet become popular in this country.

Since then, we have never backed down from the original lies. In fact, we have added layer upon layer of disinformation. We demonized the stuff during the late '30s and again in the '60s and '70s when it was taken up by a new generation. So we will continue . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

FIRE THE SORRY F@#ERS!!!!!!!
Posted by: stoney13 on Nov 9, 2005 9:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Vote to take the power away from the will of the people? YOUR ASS IS FIRED!!!!! Vote to prevent a law passed by the people from being implimented? YOU"RE FIRED!!!!! Try to keep medical marijauna of a ballot? YOU'RE FIRED!!!!!!!

THE GRAND MYTH OF THE DRACONIAN DRUG LAWS IS OVER!!! IT'S UP TO US TO END THE WASTE OF LIVES AND MONEY!!!!

As far as the good ju8dge Retchin is concerned, the people of Washington DC will have to speak with one voice to get this insufferable bitch of their bench!! The Washington Post can only report this travesty! It's up to the People of Washington DC to get rid of this bitch!! She lied in from the bench!!! That's a crime!! Demand justice!!! If the District attorney doesn't write the warrant, FIRE THE SON OF A BITCH!!!!

WE HAVE A VOICE HERE!!! IF WE KEEP LETTING THE GOVERNMENT TAKE IT AWAY BECAUSE THEY THINK THEY HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS, WE WILL ALL DIE IN JAIL!!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

oh my god
Posted by: karyse on Nov 9, 2005 10:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I too wept as I was reading this story. Then I got blazing angry.

There is only ONE reason for those in power to keep marijuana off the streets -- they want a violent underclass; they NEED a violent underclass, to justify the militarization of the police force who are in place to protect the wealthy -- Period.

Crack cocaine fits the bill nicely. They choked off the pot supply precisely BECAUSE no one fears pot heads. Pot is why, in the sixties, black, white, mexican, polka dotted people, all worked (and smoked) together, and, most importantly, threatened the "powers that be" TOGETHER.

The easiest way to ensure that it wouldn't happen again is to remove the "drug" that caused the population to see the value of "make love not war," to see the value in "all of us are brothers and sisters," to see the value in unifed action.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: oh my god Posted by: Lincoln fan
bikey
Posted by: bikey on Nov 9, 2005 1:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arguably, no country in the world has sunk so low. The Congress, the judge, it's all the same package, cut out of whole cloth as they say. America has become inhumanity incarnate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pot opens up too many minds!
Posted by: getagrip on Nov 9, 2005 2:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pretty straight forward......pot causes you to think and sometimes think very deeply. This opens up our minds. And this is the real reason it is illegal. Governments cannot control citizens who have open minds. They use FEAR as their weapon and people with open minds fear much less.

Of course there is always the other reason. Hemp would completely take down the paper, textile, fuel, protein industries. Gotta make sure Dupont keeps raking in the dough.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bummer
Posted by: jwg on Nov 9, 2005 2:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I had this wonderful idea of how to solve this whole mess, but I forgot.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bummer Posted by: ConnecttheDots
Judiciary
Posted by: spring on Nov 9, 2005 3:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The U.S. Constitution requires judges (and legislators) to be bound by oath or affirmation to support the Constitution, not the rule of law. The purposes of the Constitution as defined in the Preamble are: establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.

Cannabis prohibition was based on false premises. How can that serve justice or promote the general welfare? Unfortunately, legislators who support flawed policy on a federal level, such as severe criminal penalties related to cannabis prohibition are only accountable to their states' voters. Controlled substances regulation properly belongs to the states to regulate within the restraints of the Constitution. It is unfortunate that the courts have let the people down when it comes to the 9th and 10th Amendments as well as the Preamble.

Citizens who value human dignity need to find a way to have judges whose conduct does not serve justice removed from the bench.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Role of the Courts
Posted by: EncinoM on Nov 9, 2005 7:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Courts are bound to follow the rule of law, as dictated by Congress, unless the Law violates the an article or amendment of the Constitution. The Judge should of found confinement to a jail would violate the prisoners 8th Amendment right, and sentence to house confinment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Goddamn Government
Posted by: doneman2000 on Nov 10, 2005 12:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As someone who was recently busted for growing my own medical grade cannabis I must say these stooges of prohibition along with our nickle and dime legislators are rather adamant about keeping cannabis illegal. Last year there where 775,000 arrests for pot, 89% for possession only. That's alot of business around the courthouses folks, not to mention all the stays in our prisons (a growth industry in America). I've written to my legislators (mostly GOP fascists) and the replies I've received are astoundingly stupid. I know as long as the GOP has anything to do with it the sick, hurt, and dying will continue to suffer. As strange as it maybe the lead narc seemed to have sympathy for me, especially after seeing my broken body, partially paralyzed legs, in all my glory wearing adult diapers to keep most of my excrement from running down my legs. My cannabis was about the only thing which raised my quality of life just a little. Goddamn government fascists. Fuck every politician keeping me away from Gods medicine. I'll stand before my maker with my story and they can stand and tell theirs, without all the lies. Frankly, I'd say I was the one in the best position as "just doing my job" is an excuse that's been handed down by cowards throughout mans history. That's why God gave us brains so we could tell right from wrong, regardless what some slimy ass bought and paid for politician is paid to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Weeping for the weary
Posted by: Bearzerker on Nov 10, 2005 1:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The lies and arguments supporting prohibition is laughable.

The lies? The ineptitude? The GRAFT?
Don't you see what it's doing to all of us? not just U.S.
Besides the fact that the whole argument is a catch 22 that just won't go away, it leaves us with weepers like this ... suffering individual unable to defend himself, but willing to make the ultimate sacrifice in order to force open the eyes of the non-blind... and how many others are there?

How many more Official Commisions, Reports et al. have to be done just in order to justify the legally adopted "medicinal use of Hemp" Legislation of so many States, Provinces & Territories and how is it that "YOUR" federal authority can/is blocking the legitimate medicinal research of this PLANT, when so many jurisdictions have approved its medicinal use? ...If the argument is so convincing, proof must abound!...

Just when our political process was about to pass decriminization in Canada, your Justice system turns its guns on Marc Emery... A Canadian Marihuana Political Advocate [who has almost single handedly won this war based on common sense] and threatens economic KAOS for both countries

There is so much misinformation about the "Dangers of Hemp" that even people of simple intelligence don't believe it anymore, which in turns undermines the whole Judicary Process. "Monsters are never born, but are created in your overcrowded Penal System every day"

Here's just a few articles supporting the medicinal use of Hemp

Marijuana might cause new cell growth in the brain
and
Pot not a major cancer risk report
are just a few I gleaned when I google'd the issue

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

High Hopes Gone Bad
Posted by: gonzoskismet on Nov 10, 2005 3:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know, back in the Sixties, I thought we would be smarter than this by the 21st century. I dreamed we would be living on the moon and other planets too. But what my young, idealistic mind could not conceive then was a society so evil, so materialistic, so self-centered that they would let a quadreplegic
die just because he used the Gentle Weed as a medicine. I see now that my ideas were too far reaching for a society that considers its own laws above human suffering. That considers a dollar to be worth more than a human life. We're some sad motherf**kers to allow this situation to continue but the only way to change it is to get into the streets, people. These politicians take no notice if you don't force them to. You've got to hit these people in the head with a sledgehammer or it just doesn't get through.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

judge comments
Posted by: charlie1 on Nov 25, 2005 5:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
in this whole case, i think the only person that should be punished is the judge. i mean come on now. a judge should be smart enough to foresee somebody with a disability such as this one, that the person would need alot of medical attention. being a judge you need to be pretty darn smart. how could this one not be. was she trying to punish the poor soul because he was caught with a great deal of weed. AGAIN let me comment that this is not a great judge, so much so, that a person died basically in her instructions. she is the only one that should be sued, but FIRED first.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]