O.C. Judge’s Drug Proposal Ignites Furor

A day after he proposed making heroin, cocaine and marijuana legal because the “war on drugs is lost,” Orange County Superior Court Judge James P. Gray felt the heat Thursday from the firestorm he ignited.

Telephone calls from the public poured into his courtroom as county and federal law enforcement officials formally denounced Gray’s legalization plan, likening it to a Pandora’s box that would create as many problems as Gray claimed would be eliminated.

“How would we tell our children this stuff is bad for you once it is legal?” said Fullerton Police Chief Phil Goehring, president of the Orange County Chiefs and Sheriffs Assn. “More addicts, more broken families, more health problems and higher uses of our medical facilities are a certainty. How many children will be born addicted to these drugs?”

At the central courthouse in Santa Ana, people stopped Gray in the halls or outside to talk about his proposal. His bailiff was busy all day handling scores of phone calls and keeping track of supporters and opponents.

Gray estimated the calls were running about 60% in his favor.

“The real thing is that people are starting to suggest alternatives, suggest things that I haven’t thought of about what would happen in the event that we do something,” the judge said. “That is the whole idea. We need to have people discuss alternatives and address the situation. I think that we are starting to, and I’m gratified.”

The controversy surrounding Gray began Wednesday when the 47-year-old jurist held a news conference in front of the courthouse and proposed that the use and sale of marijuana, cocaine and heroin be legalized for adults.

Under his plan, the drugs would be sold at licensed neighborhood pharmacies and taxed to fund drug education and treatment programs. He contended that current drug laws are ineffective, cause jail overcrowding and perpetuate a substantial amount of crime.

His proposal is not much different than others advanced by such prominent people as conservative columnist William F. Buckley, former U.S. Atty. Ramsey Clark and Baltimore Mayor Kurt Schmoke.

Gray’s proposal was immediately criticized Wednesday by Sheriff Brad Gates and other county officials, including Board of Supervisors Chairman Roger R. Stanton, Dist. Atty. Michael R. Capizzi and Donald E. Smallwood, the presiding judge of Orange County Superior Court.

Smallwood said that Gray risked possible violations of state judicial canons, which require that judges perform their duties with impartiality and give the appearance of impartiality. However, the same canons, Smallwood said, allow judges to speak out on topics related to the improvement of the administration of justice, which is open to wide interpretation.

“That is one criticism that I simply do not believe I am subject to,” said Gray, a former federal prosecutor and defense attorney in the U.S. Navy. “Judges follow the law whether we believe in them or not.”

Ron Talmo, dean of the Western State University College of Law campus in Irvine, defended Gray’s right to speak out on a controversial issue regarding the criminal justice system.

“He went out of the way to say that he would follow the law,” Talmo said. “He did the exact thing that the rest of the judges should be doing--voicing a matter of opinion.”

The imbroglio rekindled the debate over the effectiveness of the so-called war on drugs, which was first initiated by President Richard M. Nixon more than 20 years ago. Gray found himself defending against local and federal law enforcement officials who disputed his claim that they are losing the fight.

“There is no question that we haven’t won this war, but we have some real success stories here,” said Special Agent Ralph Lochridge, a spokesman for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. “Use of drugs is declining, and we have made inroads against the Colombian cartels. We should not be surrendering at this point.”

But Gray said his own personal experience with drug enforcement was one of frustration, which, over the years, helped shape his decision to go public with his personal views.

“I think sitting (through) the felony preliminary hearing calendar in Division 311, watching the senselessness of all of these cases, all of the resources, probably pushed me over the edge,” Gray said. “It was a parade of defeat, and that’s what probably did it for me as far as a real catharsis.”

Though not disheartened, law enforcement officials said that the drug enforcement effort has been a mix of success and failure. Arrests and seizures of drugs are still substantial, they said, and have increased for some police agencies.

On the other hand, while so-called casual use of cocaine and other drugs has declined by roughly 50%, according to some national surveys, the number of hard-core abusers, as defined by daily use, has increased.

According to federal studies, the number of Americans who use illegal drugs slid to 13 million in 1990 from 23 million in 1985. Another government survey, released in June, 1991, found a 15% increase, to 336,000, in the number of people who use cocaine daily.

Also cause for dismay is what happens to drug cases as they proceed through the criminal justice system, where an estimated 75% of all criminal cases in Orange County are drug-related, according to the district attorney’s office.

Over the past 10 years, state Department of Justice statistics show that roughly half of all felony drug arrests in Orange County end in a jail sentence, but less than 5% result in a prison term.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Carl Armbrust, who specializes in drug prosecutions in Orange County, said the lack of punishment is one reason for continuing narcotics abuse.

“The cost of business certainly isn’t high enough,” Armbrust said. “If you are making $1,000 a day selling drugs, what is four months in jail? There is no deterrent. Judges don’t need to surrender. They need to say drugs are bad and give maximum sentences.”

The drug trade also is dynamic, changing with the latest fad or available drug. Methamphetamine, which can be made in a bathroom with the right equipment, is becoming increasingly popular as a crackdown has made a dent in the northward flow of cocaine from South America. Similarly, heroin production has surged in Southeast Asia, particularly in the Golden Triangle area of Thailand, Laos and Myanmar (formerly Burma).

“Cocaine use and cocaine seizures have dropped off,” said Agent J.D. Miles, who heads the state’s narcotic enforcement unit in Santa Ana. “But pot, methamphetamine and heroin use have gone up. Have we necessarily gained anything? No. . . . The war is not won, but I think in the battle with cocaine in California, we have made great strides.”

Law enforcement officials said that the legalization of marijuana, cocaine and heroin will not necessarily get rid of the social problems Gray said it will. Some property crimes and jail crowding might be eliminated, they said, but another set of problems, similar to those caused by alcohol abuse, will result.

Also, legalization of drugs for adults will not keep drugs away from juveniles. Black markets will result, police said, and the use of drugs not covered by Gray’s proposal, such as methamphetamine, LSD, PCP and so-called designer drugs, would continue unabated.

Gray retorted that drugs are very obtainable for minors without his proposal.

“It is now as accessible as can be,” he said. “It is being sold around the schools, regretfully. We’re not going to make this so exciting for people anymore. It will be more mundane because it is available. We won’t have this (drug) pushing anymore.”

Education has been effective, Gray acknowledged, but certain people will continue to use drugs whether they are legal or not and simply putting people in jail is not an effective remedy.

“There’s the expected negative reaction, and that’s logical,” Gray said of the flap over his proposal. “My goodness, I’ve been thinking about this for years, and it’s taken me several years to come around to this point of view. How can you expect people on an emotional issue like this to change their minds overnight?”