Help Roderick Walker, Serving Life in Prison for LSD

[dwpineal]

http://www.politicallysuspect.com/2014/06/16/help-roderick-walker-serving-life-prison-lsd/

Help Roderick Walker, Serving Life in Prison for LSD

Posted on June 16, 2014 | Leave a comment

Just because states across the nation have loosened cannabis laws does not mean that the drug war has suddenly come to a close. A reader recently contacted me about a friend, Roderick Walker, who will spend his entire life in jail. Walker did not murder anyone. He did not rape anyone. He did not assault anyone. His crime was as simple as it was benign: he sold some acid.

Since the 1970s, the classic psychedelic drug has been unjustly demonized by the Federal Government (who, in effort to study mind control, would run about dosing unwitting citizens with it as part of the CIA’s highly illegal MK ULTRA program.) While psychologists consider the drug highly potent, it has never resulted in a single overdose. If the stories about “drop acid seven times and you’re legally insane” were true, John Lennon should have been in a padded room. Steve Jobs may not have engineered Apple.

Of course, the vast majority of psychedelic drug users will not go on to become artistic or technologic visionaries. Many of them instead pursue the peaceful community that surrounds jam bands—such as the Grateful Dead—committing no crime other than separating themselves from the rat race. Roderick Walker was one such individual. He crafted jewelry to sell at the shows. He has a son and daughter who he will probably not see again.

Look, I understand if you disagree with me about drugs. While I do not agree that the government has some custodial role to play in limiting the availability of certain substances, I understand that others might be of that belief. Regardless, there is no way you can support the Draconian sentences that ruin the lives of individuals and eventually cost you, the tax payer. Think about it. Walker’s supposed crimes amounted to a few hundred or, at the most, a few thousand dollars in illicit transactions. Whereas Walker might have contributed to society through making and selling jewelry, he will now absorb over $30,000 a year in public funds for the rest of his life.

And sure, you can say that given his previous drug charges, Roderick was playing with fire and got burnt. I’ve heard this sort of thing before—“He got what he deserved, if you can’t do the time don’t do the crime, etc.” It’s a classic example that even if you’re around something that stinks, your nose eventually stops smelling it (ask any garbage man). Since the absurd penalties for drug offenses have been around for so long, no one questions these policies, which only serve to increase the state’s power and normalize its Draconian behavior. Hence, most people are not surprised or even bothered by the fact that minor drug dealers with no history of violence receive sentences longer than rapists and murders.

But make no mistake; life in prison for a nonviolent crime is the very definition of injustice. Even worse, in order to review the documents pertaining to his case from behind bars, Walker must go through the FOIA (Freedom of Information Act). The documents cost $0.10 each, and the government is currently withholding some 39,000 pages of them. In other words, it would cost $4,000 for Walker to decide how he might appeal down the road.

I don’t normally ask much of my readers, but if you think what was done to Walker was an injustice, please, sign the Change.org petition. There is still hope for clemency if the petition gets enough support.

###

If you like what you read, subscribe and share!

Like me on Facebook.

Follow me on Twitter

 

[herbavore]

I signed that petition when it came through my email. It made me so sad and angry. My late son's despair was profoundly increased when he was busted with a pocket full of acid the week after he turned 18. In his own words: "Well I am now officially scum as far as the world I have to live in is concerned. I have a diagnosed "mental illness" and I am a felon." He managed to live with that despair for two more years. We need a wall like the Viet Nam war memorial with all the names from the War on Drugs.

 

[ro4eva]

I've already signed this petition (he doesn't seem like a danger to society at all), but I'm wondering, if he was non-violent and a small-time dealer, does he not meet the criteria for the target population which Eric Holder has said is having their sentences reduced?

 

[cj]

Damn they offered him a plea bargain of 8 years then give him life when he rejects it! Talk about the DA sending a message holy shit. I signed cause that's some American justice system bullshit if I have ever heard it.

 

[poledriver]

Signed. Total bullshit sentence. A couple of years yeah maybe, but life? What the hell...

I remember reading about this ages ago. Very sad.

 

[neversickanymore]

I love how fast this is getting filled up from people all over the world.

 

[CLICKHEREx]

I tried several times to sign, although everything I entered in the 3rd line showed "INVALID", but if someone informs me as to what would be an acceptable option, I'll try again, one last time.

Could someone post a question in Yahoo!Answers, (politics, law, or petitions sections?) asking people if they will sign it. Also in Drugs-forum.com

It would spread the word of this injustice far wider than here.

I'd do it, but I don't want to tie my ID there to here, (too much info that could be used to identify me) as I'm justifiably paranoid, having been busted multiple times, yet I'm just a user.

I will, however, post the above in multiple other forums.

 

[FunctionalOlfactio]

Wow, it cost ~$50,000 each year to keep this man locked up and his crime was non-violent. This country is trillions of dollars in debt and can't afford this drug war.

 

[poledriver]

Some back ground on the case -

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

May 3rd 2006

ORDER AND JUDGMENT(*)

Before TACHA, Chief Circuit Judge, ANDERSON and BALDOCK, Circuit Judges.
After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist in the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
Roderick Walker was convicted, following a jury trial, of one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute LSD, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A)(v) and 846, and four counts of using a communication facility to facilitate the commission of a felony under the Controlled Substances Act, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b). He was sentenced to a term of life imprisonment and assessed a fine of $10,000 and a special assessment of $500. He appeals his conviction, arguing that the district court committed plain error by admitting expert testimony that was unduly prejudicial.

BACKGROUND

Walker was indicted in June 2004. His trial was held over six days in April 2005. The government presented eleven witnesses. Four of these were individuals who testified that they had been involved in or had witnessed LSD distribution activities. Specifically, Charles Ledbetter testified that he had purchased LSD from Anthony May over a period of months in spring and summer 2003 and sold it to others. He testified that on August 18, 2003, he sold 95 "hits" of LSD to Special Agent Sean Henry, who was working undercover. Tr. of Jury Trial at 186, R. Vol. III. He also stated that on September 2, 2003, he sold 300 hits to Special Agent Henry, and on September 8, 2003, he sold four vials of liquid LSD, which he had purchased from May, to Special Agent Henry. Ledbetter also described a meeting he set up between May and Special Agent Henry in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on September 25, 2003, which was also attended by Thomas Mullen, whose apartment in Springfield, Missouri, was used "to stash all of the LSD." Id. at 197. Ledbetter stated that he was arrested by Special Agent Henry on October 27, 2003, and subsequently cooperated with the investigation.

Anthony May testified that he had first met "Rudd," whose real "name is Roderick Walker," id. at 262, R. Vol. IV, in May 2003 at a concert and purchased LSD from him there, and Walker had given him "a cell phone number so [he] could get ahold of him if [he] needed to do any further transactions." Id. at 263-64. He stated that he had contacted Walker, who instructed him to "wire transfer him money through Western Union." Id. at 267. May then indicated that he had wired money to Walker four times, to different locations under different names, and that Walker would mail him hits of LSD, in quantities of 500 hits a time, to different addresses. He stated he had also purchased four vials of liquid LSD from Walker, and that he had also traveled four times to a house in Kansas City to pick up LSD directly from Walker. On one of these occasions, Walker told him he was unavailable but that Elena Heschmeyer could supply him, and Heschmeyer had taken him to the same house and sold him the LSD. May indicated that he used Mullen's apartment for storage and that he sold the LSD, including the four vials of liquid LSD, to Ledbetter, who "would dispense it." Id. at 266. May also testified that he had met with Special Agent Henry in Tulsa, Oklahoma, on September 25, 2003, and had sold him 300 hits of LSD. May stated that he was arrested by Special Agent Henry on November 25, 2003, and then began cooperating with the investigation, initiating a call to Walker which was recorded. A recording was played for the jury, in which the speakers discussed buying "postcards," which May testified was "code" for "every hundred hits of LSD." Id. at 329-30.

Thomas Mullen also testified, describing the trip with Ledbetter and May from Springfield to Tulsa on September 25, 2003, and the meeting with Special Agent Henry, and stating that he had "allow[ed] narcotics to be stored at [his] home," including LSD. Id. at 436. Mullen stated that May had told him "a few times" that his source for obtaining LSD was "Walker." Id. at 439.

Elena Heschmeyer testified that she had known Walker for fourteen years. She stated that Walker had been staying at her house in Kansas City and that she had seen May visit Walker there and had seen and participated in transactions involving May's purchase of LSD from Walker. She indicated that on one occasion she had handled the sale of LSD to May, acting under Walker's direction.

Special Agent Henry testified that he was the primary case agent in the case and described the investigation. He then gave his "opinion as to the extent of [Walker's] organization," stating that he "believe[d] it's an extensive United States drug trafficking organization." Id. at 912, R. Vol. VI. He based this opinion on

the number of individuals [he had] identified, as well as the command and control mechanisms that are in place, that Mr. Walker has insulated himself from the everyday dealers, that money transfers are put in other people's names to avoid detection. Plane tickets . . . [and] [t]elephone records are put in other people's names to avoid detection. All these are a way for Mr. Walker to step up off of everyday dealing and to insulate himself from being arrested by the DEA.

Id. He further stated that, based on his training and experience, Walker was not "the average street-level dealer. We're dealing with somebody that's above that, who is orchestrating several people." Id. at 913. Special Agent Henry also was asked his opinion, based on his training and experience, as to "why there's no paper trail with regard to Walker." Id. at 1011, R. Vol. VII. Walker's defense counsel objected to this question on the ground that it called for speculation, but his objection was overruled. Special Agent Henry answered that because Walker was on parole, Walker "d[id]n't want to leave a paper trail so . . . his probation officer or myself can find out where he's at." Id. at 1011-12. The agent further opined that Walker "insulated himself. He commanded and controlled the organization. He directed other people, so . . . his name wouldn't be on the paper so we could tie him back directly to it." Id. at 1012. In the agent's opinion, Walker was "the leader of this organization." Id. Special Agent Henry was also asked his opinion on who Walker's coconspirators were, over an objection from defense counsel that the question called for speculation. The agent listed May, Ledbetter, and Heschmeyer, among others, and stated, "we go from coast to coast in this investigation, numerous individuals." Id. at 1016.

In its closing argument, the prosecution referred to Special Agent Henry's testimony, indicating that the agent had described "why there's no paper trail for Roderick Walker, why he never had a hotel room . . . or a wire transfer . . . or a plane ticket in his name, is to insulate himself from the organization, consistent with what drug dealers do. And that is exactly what is going on in this case." Id. at 1084.

The jury found Walker guilty on the five counts submitted to it, as indicated above. Following sentencing, Walker appealed.

DISCUSSION

The sole issue Walker raises on appeal is that Special Agent Henry's "opinions should not have been allowed" because they constituted impermissible and prejudicial "expert testimony as to the means drug traffickers use to avoid detection and arrest" and "expert testimony on the method of operation of drug dealers." Appellant's Br. at 5. Walker acknowledges that he did not object to Special Agent Henry's testimony on this basis below. Our review is therefore for plain error. United States v. Ramirez, 348 F.3d 1175, 1181 (10th Cir. 2004). Accordingly, even if we agree that the testimony was inadmissible, we may reverse only if the error was "plain or obvious" and "affect[ed] substantial rights, in other words, in most cases the error . . . must have affected the outcome of the trial, in that it seriously affected the fairness, integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings." United States v. Bailey, 327 F.3d 1131, 1142 (10th Cir. 2003) (internal quotation, citation, and alteration marks omitted).

The admissibility of expert testimony at trial is governed by Fed. R. Evid. 702. This rule states, in relevant part:

If . . . specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion . . . , if (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data, (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods, and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the case.

Fed. R. Evid. 702.

Essentially, Walker argues that Special Agent Henry's testimony as described above was not helpful to the jury because it contained no specialized information about drug trafficking that "the average juror [would not already know] from movies, television crime dramas, and news stories." Appellant's Br. at 5. He therefore claims that Special Agent Henry's testimony merely "served to tell the jury that [Walker] was guilty." Id. For this argument, he primarily relies on the Second Circuit's opinion in United States v. Cruz, 981 F.2d 659 (2d Cir. 1992). That case held a law enforcement officer's testimony that drug transactions often involve "the use of guns and the forcing of customers to snort cocaine to weed out undercover officers" was inadmissible because it served merely to bolster the credibility of a fact-witness who had testified that such conduct had occurred. Id. at 663. The court explained that such testimony by the officer "strongly suggests to the jury" that the officer "believes the government's witness[] to be credible and the defendant to be guilty." Id. Its prejudicial effect therefore substantially outweighed its probative value. See id.; see also United States v. Montas, 41 F.3d 775, 784 (1st Cir. 1994) (holding officer's testimony erroneously admitted where he had "testified about matters that were readily intelligible" to the jury).

"This [c]ourt has repeatedly held that in narcotics cases, expert testimony [by a law enforcement officer] can assist the jury in understanding transactions and terminology." United States v. Quintana, 70 F.3d 1167, 1171 (10th Cir. 1995); see also United States v. Torres, 53 F.3d 1129, 1141 (10th Cir. 1995) (distinguishing testimony in that case from that in Cruz). The government argues that Special Agent Henry's testimony in this case was admissible expert testimony because it "offer[ed] his opinion with regard to Walker's drug trafficking organization, how it was organized and what steps Walker took to insulate himself from the everyday dealers." Appellee's Br. at 12. Based on our review of the record, we agree.

Moreover, even assuming Special Agent Henry's testimony on these matters was unfairly prejudicial in regard to some issues, such as the question of whether Walker was the leader of an extensive nationwide drug trafficking organization, we would not hold that there is plain error. The charges against Walker did not rely on his being a leader, or on the extensiveness of the conspiracy, and the testimony of other witnesses amply supported his convictions on those charges. We therefore affirm Walker's conviction.(1)

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

Stephen H. Anderson

Circuit Judge

FOOTNOTES

Click footnote number to return to corresponding location in the text.
*.This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

1.Walker has renewed his motions to file a supplemental brief and to replace his attorney, which were previously denied. Once again, these motions are denied. We note that in Walker's motion to file a supplemental brief, he indicated that he wished to assert the claim that this court lacks jurisdiction over this case. This claim is meritless. To the extent Walker seeks to argue that his counsel was ineffective, such a claim should be brought in collateral proceedings rather than on direct appeal. United States v. Brooks, 438 F.3d 1231, 1242 (10th Cir. 2006).

http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2006/05/05-5127.htm

 

[cj]

Yeah he is basically fucked on appeal. His only chance is a pardon

 

[slimvictor]

Life in jail for a victimless "crime"?
What a world we live in.
Just shocking that human governments run things in such a way.

I signed that petition when it came through my email. It made me so sad and angry. My late son's despair was profoundly increased when he was busted with a pocket full of acid the week after he turned 18. In his own words: "Well I am now officially scum as far as the world I have to live in is concerned. I have a diagnosed "mental illness" and I am a felon." He managed to live with that despair for two more years. We need a wall like the Viet Nam war memorial with all the names from the War on Drugs.

Wow, that is such a sad story, herbavore!
Sorry to hear about it.
And I agree about the memorial for victims of the war on drugs.

 

[ro4eva]

This is so sad and frustrating.

As far as we know, we all only get one chance to live our lives. And it's a pretty short one when you consider the age of the cosmos.

Apparently we live in nations which should be free of fascism, injustice, discrimination, and, in which we are supposedly free to pursue our feelings, desires, and happiness in general.

We are aware that it is wrong to steal, to physically harm another human being, to cheat, and to undermine our birthplace's ability to defend itself by willfully sharing secrets with the enemy.

In one of these nations, the self-proclaimed "greatest country on Earth," good men and women are rotting away in public and private prisons, at a rate which exceeds that of any other sovereign state on this planet - even though, its total population makes up for a measly 5% of the entire world.

These men and women did not cause anyone any physical harm. They did not steal, and they did not cheat. They sure as hell never did betray their nationality by sharing classified information with a rival. Good lord, these men and women may not have even advertised their ability to partially/temporarily meet a small portion of the never-ending demand for intoxicants.

When they did conduct business with customers, most of these men and women were loyal, respectful, and careful to always be punctual and discreet.

Many of them are rotting away in prison for life. All because they didn't ask some politically-motivated politician for permission to sell their product.

Meanwhile, pharmaceutical giants have:

- Repeatedly lied to and betrayed the public's trust by omitting critically important information about a potentially deadly new Rx drug in order to make money.
- Repeatedly lied to and betrayed the public's trust by deliberately changing the dosage recommendations of a potentially deadly new Rx drug in order to make more money.
- Caused the deaths of countless patients as a result of their greed.
- Caused irreversible injury and/or disability to countless patients as a result of their greed.

Every time when a government does decide to hold these drug dealers with permission slips accountable for their felonious actions - which doesn't happen often - the result is always a slap on the wrist in the form of a fucking fine!

Benzodiazepines? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible.

Vioxx? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible.

OxyContin? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible. Not even an employee demotion.

Non-violent, low level (street) dealer arrested for possession of Schedule I drug? Several years, to life, to death by execution - depending on which "democratic" nation he's caught in.

I am so glad that more and more people of "the free world" have come to realize how dirty and crooked their political representatives really are, and how untrustworthy and abusive, those who are supposed to protect and to serve really are. And as the years continue to go by, it only has gotten worse.

Thank you Edward Snowden for having the courage to show the world that human rights have taken a back seat to what is a dictatorial democracy. And thank you also to Mr./Mrs. Manning.

Thank you Rob Ford for showing your true colors. You may have unwittingly contributed to radical reform, as well as the end of your political career. And I highly doubt California will receive you with open arms when you retire - in about 4 months from now.

And to whomever is next - thank you in advance, because you have all confirmed that our governments are not the saints they like to portray themselves as. Not even close.

 

[slimvictor]

^ nice post, Ro!

 

[ro4eva]

^ nice post, Ro!

Appreciate it, but I did a horrendous job in that I didn't bother to proofread.

 

[dragonix]

This is so sad and frustrating.

As far as we know, we all only get one chance to live our lives. And it's a pretty short one when you consider the age of the cosmos.

Apparently we live in nations which should be free of fascism, injustice, discrimination, and, in which we are supposedly free to pursue our feelings, desires, and happiness in general.

We are aware that it is wrong to steal, to physically harm another human being, to cheat, and to undermine our birthplace's ability to defend itself by willfully sharing secrets with the enemy.

In one of these nations, the self-proclaimed "greatest country on Earth," good men and women are rotting away in public and private prisons, at a rate which exceeds that of any other sovereign state on this planet - even though, its total population makes up for a measly 5% of the entire world.

These men and women did not cause anyone any physical harm. They did not steal, and they did not cheat. They sure as hell never did betray their nationality by sharing classified information with a rival. Good lord, these men and women may not have even advertised their ability to partially/temporarily meet a small portion of the never-ending demand for intoxicants.

When they did conduct business with customers, most of these men and women were loyal, respectful, and careful to always be punctual and discreet.

Many of them are rotting away in prison for life. All because they didn't ask some politically-motivated politician for permission to sell their product.

Meanwhile, pharmaceutical giants have:

- Repeatedly lied to and betrayed the public's trust by omitting critically important information about a potentially deadly new Rx drug in order to make money.
- Repeatedly lied to and betrayed the public's trust by deliberately changing the dosage recommendations of a potentially deadly new Rx drug in order to make more money.
- Caused the deaths of countless patients as a result of their greed.
- Caused irreversible injury and/or disability to countless patients as a result of their greed.

Every time when a government does decide to hold these drug dealers with permission slips accountable for their felonious actions - which doesn't happen often - the result is always a slap on the wrist in the form of a fucking fine!

Benzodiazepines? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible.

Vioxx? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible.

OxyContin? Fine. No jail time for those directly responsible. Not even an employee demotion.

Non-violent, low level (street) dealer arrested for possession of Schedule I drug? Several years, to life, to death by execution - depending on which "democratic" nation he's caught in.

I am so glad that more and more people of "the free world" have come to realize how dirty and crooked their political representatives really are, and how untrustworthy and abusive, those who are supposed to protect and to serve really are. And as the years continue to go by, it only has gotten worse.

Thank you Edward Snowden for having the courage to show the world that human rights have taken a back seat to what is a dictatorial democracy. And thank you also to Mr./Mrs. Manning.

Thank you Rob Ford for showing your true colors. You may have unwittingly contributed to radical reform, as well as the end of your political career. And I highly doubt California will receive you with open arms when you retire - in about 4 months from now.

And to whomever is next - thank you in advance, because you have all confirmed that our governments are not the saints they like to portray themselves as. Not even close.

Thank you sir