Outside the law?

I read with interest an newspaper article from around a month ago which highlighted the arrest of Hans and Eve Rausing for drugs offences after she was caught trying to smuggle heroin and crack into a function at the American embassy in London. When police searched the couples home in an exclusive part of Chelsea, they found more crack and heroin and nearly £2000 worth of cocaine. Hans is a heir to the multi-billion pound Tetra Pak drinks carton empire and Eve is the daughter of a Pepsi-Cola executive.

But none of this so far is very unusual, well ok, getting caught with class A drugs whilst trying to get into a party at the American Embassy has never happened to me but it's what I read next that bothered me. At a hearing at Westminster Magistrates it was announced that all charges are to be dropped. Yes, dropped! They are to receive conditional cautions. Exactly what this means I'm not sure but it's probable that they will have to attend some kind drug misuse programmes.

Why, just because they're well known socialites, should they be treated any differently? How can the Crown Prosecution Service justify treating this case differently to any other drug possession case? 

What gets me the most about this isn't the fact that they've been 'let off' but that this course of action isn't normally used. Surely it's better to offer the opportunity of good treatment options to those with substance misuse issues? We all know that throwing people in jail doesn't 'cure' addiction! It's obvious from this that when it's one of the middle/upper classes own that's been caught with drugs and admitted they have an addiction; they're treated a lot differently to the working class addict.

If this course of action is the right one for this kind of case why isn't it the course of action taken that is normally taken?

Addiction shouldn't be treated as a criminal issue. It's a health and social issue and therefore the answers to it will come from the health and social field.

Wired In volunteers kick ass!

Earlier today I had a meeting with Rachel, a researcher from a TV production company based in London. The company she works for is looking to make a hard hitting, 2-part documentary about cocaine and heroin, which is planned to cover the whole process involved with drugs, that's everything from the farmers who grow the crops, to the street level user and the drug policy's that effect everyone, across the world.

They are looking for a city in the UK to film the heroin part of the program, and it looks like that city could be Cardiff! Rachel wanted to meet up with our volunteers to find out their feelings and thoughts on the issues facing drug users, how the drug policy's in place affect them and also to see if they wanted to be part of the cast!

Three of our volunteers were there, Chris Hobbs, Patrick McClellan and Brian White. It was a great meeting, everyone got stuck in debating the different issues that drug users are facing, from how people get into it, right through to how people get into recovery and what the treatment services can offer to them. We got on so well that three hours later we were still chatting! 

Rachel seemed to have a passion for the truth and I got a really good feeling about what her company wanted to do. But if there's one thing that stood out for me, it's how proud I felt of the guys there. They've come such a long way in a short time, and for them to be there, meeting with a production company researcher, who wants to put them on prime time! Well I'm filling up just thinking about it. Next stop Hollywood lads!

Everyone of the guy's there was an ex-heroin user. It just shows that addiction can be overcome and it is possible to have a fulfilling, active life after drug addiction. I'm not just talking about a lucky few people who manage to cling on to recovery by the skin of their teeth, I'm saying that EVERYONE who has a drug addiction has the potential within themselves to conquer it and live a free life again. That inner potential just needs to be realised and gently nurtured in a supportive atmosphere.

 

Honesty:The best policy?

Nick Clegg, the new Liberal Democrat leader was recently interviewed by GQ magazine, obviously an attempt to raise his profile in the "right" circles. While admitting he'd had "no more than thirty" lovers in his life, he point blank refused to answer whether he'd ever smoked a joint.
Likewise, David Cameron, the Conservative leader admits to membership of the Bullingdon Club, famous for smashing up top class restaurants. But clams up when asked about any drug linked exploits, even failing to deny claims in a biography that he came close to being expelled from Eton for using cannabis.
Nick Clegg is well known for calling for honesty in politics, but only as much as he is comfortable with it seems. Do politicians think it is better to say nothing when confronted? That we will all forget in time, if they look at their shoe's every time they're asked?

For me this question should have two possible responses from anybody who has ever partaken, starting either- Yes I have tried it, but regret it..., or, Yes I have tried it, and don't regret it...

On the other hand I applaud Boris Johnson, Henley MP and Conservative candidate for Mayor of London. Interviewed on Friday he admitted to both snorting coke and smoking ganja, saying that "The stuff you and I may have smoked is not the same as the kid's are having now. I think skunk and this stuff is very, very dangerous......I thoroughly disagree with drugs. I don't want my kids having drugs."
Surely it's far better to openly admit to your actions and give your reasons why they are mistakes, that you now regret. This would give the public correct information, allowing them to make their own informed decisions.

I hope this takes precedent in the world of politics and other MPs follow suite.

What do you think, is honesty the best policy?