Pubdate: Sun, 04 Aug 2002
Source: St. Petersburg Times (FL)
Copyright: 2002 St. Petersburg Times
Contact:  http://www.sptimes.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/419
Note: Article credited to the Los Angeles Times.
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/raves.htm (Raves)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mdma.htm (Ecstasy)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?158 (Club Drugs)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth)

IS WAR ON RAVES AN ATTACK ON DRUGS OR FREEDOM?

NEW ORLEANS -- Dawn was approaching when the outlaw wizard stepped center 
stage at the State Palace Theatre to survey his electronic wonderland. 
Laser lights strafed the grand old chandeliers overhead and deafening 
machine music rattled the opera boxes. The floor was packed with young, 
sweaty dancers.

"Great crowd," J. Donnie Estopinal said. And then, with a boyish smile, he 
added: "I wonder which ones are the cops?"

The 32-year-old hefted a chugging smoke machine and aimed it toward the 
audience of more than 3,300. If there were any undercover drug agents in 
the Canal Street theater -- and there almost certainly were -- Estopinal 
was suddenly gone, vanished in a billowing white cloud. It was a rare 
moment of low visibility for the rave promoter whose parties have been the 
center of a federal war on raves.

The newest front in that government campaign is a Senate bill that has wide 
support on Capitol Hill. That's the RAVE Act, which stands for Reducing 
America's Vulnerability to Ecstasy.

The act would tweak a 16-year-old federal drug law, originally crafted to 
prosecute owners of crack houses, by expanding its definition of a site 
devoted to drug enterprise to include one-time events and outdoor 
gatherings. Its model has been the case of United States of America vs. 
Estopinal.

"I still can't believe it sometimes, when I think of what's happened," 
Estopinal said. "They told me these federal drug laws were going to put me 
in prison for 20 years. But not for buying drugs, not for selling drugs, 
not for using drugs. They never said I did any of that. They said I put on 
raves."

Estopinal said his only knowledge of drugs at his raves is the "same common 
sense knowledge that tells me there's drugs at concerts and clubs 
everywhere." The government case against Estopinal fizzled and charges 
against him were eventually dropped, but the campaign has sent a chill 
through not only the electronic dance world, but also the ranks of civil 
liberty advocates.

"The State Palace case was the opening battle and it's absolutely critical 
in understanding the RAVE Act, which now appears to be a priority in Senate 
with a very frightening prospect of passing," said Graham Boyd, an attorney 
with the ACLU Drug Policy Litigation Project. "What's extraordinary here is 
the government recasting of the drug laws to take an activity that has 
never been considered criminal before and then criminalize it."

"Basically," the attorney said, "we're talking about putting on a party."

Not so, says Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., who introduced the RAVE Act and has 
taken a prominent role in Senate hearings over the past two years regarding 
ecstasy and other club drugs.

"Promoters who sponsor events where people can dance in a safe, drug- free 
environment have nothing to fear from my bill," Biden said. "My legislation 
is aimed at the promoters who seek to profit from knowingly putting their 
customers at risk. . . . Quite frankly, I don't care what type of music is 
playing or what the venue is. What I do care about is ... promoters who 
turn their events into drug dens."

While the RAVE Act and the prosecution of Estopinal are matters of law, a 
core question of the debate is cultural and generational: Are raves about 
music or drugs?

Opponents of the RAVE Act say the law could be stretched to go after 
concert promoters who book reggae artists and sell marijuana-themed T- 
shirts, or venues that host jam bands in the Grateful Dead tradition and 
sell black-light posters.

In 1986, the Crack House Laws were created to help police fight the 
anonymous churn of cocaine houses. Dealers arrested in the morning were 
replaced by afternoon, so the law made it a felony to knowingly house and 
profit a drug enterprise.

In New Orleans in January 2001, a federal grand jury was asked: Are rave 
promoters really all that different from the property owners who collect 
cash for letting drug dealers set up shop under their roof? The answer came 
in an indictment against Estopinal and the owners of the State Palace.

At the raves, throbbing electronic music and pulsing psychedelic lights 
create sensory overload. And, of course, there are drugs.

The effects of ecstasy include a euphoria, increased sensuality and a 
buzzing intensification of the senses -- all of which are stoked by the 
rave atmosphere. But ecstasy and other club drugs such as ketamine and GHB 
can also be hazardous for ravers who dance in crowded, broiling rooms for 
marathon parties. Body temperatures soar, hydration dips, kidneys can fail 
and seizures can set in.

When authorities came after Estopinal and the owners of the venue, Robert 
and Brian Brunet, they pointed to a parade of limp youngsters taken to 
local hospitals. When he introduced the legislation, Biden cited Drug 
Enforcement Administration estimates that 400 teens attending State Palace 
raves had overdosed over a two-year period, a total hotly contested by 
Estopinal. There is no debate, however, that in 1998, a 17-year-old girl 
who had been at a State Palace rave died of drug-related causes.

In the months leading up to the grand jury, DEA undercover agents reported 
that they bought 13 grams of ecstasy at eight State Palace raves. The 
government would argue that Estopinal and the Brunet brothers knew dealers 
were active at the raves and sold items -- such as glow sticks, baby 
pacifiers, mentholated inhalers -- associated with club drug culture.

The government did win a plea bargain, but it was a muted victory. All 
charges against Estopinal and the Brunets as individuals were dropped. 
Instead the corporation that owned the State Palace entered a guilty plea 
on the crack house law, accepted a $100,000 fine and agreed to a ban on 
items such as glow sticks.

The $100,000 fine has never been collected, Boyd said, and an ACLU suit on 
behalf of State Palace patrons and artists negated the ban on rave items.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Al Winters, who handled the State Palace case, said 
Thursday that he could not comment on the case. He did offer one insight: 
"Once we executed search warrants at the State Palace theater, the 
overdoses in the local hospitals went from 12 every time they had a rave to 
none. None. That's why we got into the case. It was to try to stop the 
overdoses, and so far we're successful."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jackl