DOCSLIB.ORG

Macdonald V Mcginniss

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Macdonald V Mcginniss MacDonald vs. McGinniss Trial Transcript i. UNITED STATES DIRSTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 4 HONORABLE WILLIAM J. REA, JUDGE PRESIDINC 5 G 7 8 DR. JEFFREY R- MAC DONALD, 9 Plaintiff 10 vs. No. CV 84-6170-WJR 11 JOE-MC GINNISS, 12 Defendant. 13 v\ 14 m .\ ^ REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS 16-. Los Angeles, California 17 Thursday, July 30, 1987 18 19 20 21 Sherrill Boutte, CSR Official Court Reporter 22 402 United States Courthouse v.. 312 North Spring Street 23 Los Angeles, California 90012 (213) 613-1381 24 25 INDEX I 2 3 4 WITNESSES 5 6 PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS: , DIRECT' CROSS REDIRECT RE-CROSS : 7 MAC DONALD, JEFFREY' R.' "•> 4 8 I 9 10 ... >*-• 11 12 13 EXHIBITS. >; 14 B* (FOR*-- 15 EXHIBIT '' ID ENTIFI CAT I ON >\r"TEV/I~DENCE 16 159 5 17 474 58 5 8 .-M; IS 475 58 59 19 476 59 59 20 21 22 REPORTED BY: 23 Sherrill Boutte Pages 3 56 3*., Sft' 24 Kathleen Haaland 57 87 25 -••V "-^ A .• v*e_ \v , 1 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY, JULY 30, 1987; 10:00 AM to 2 r THE CLERK: Civil 84-6170-WJR, a f i 4 Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald vs. Joe McGinniss. Counsel, please state your appearances. 5 6 MR. BOSTWICK: Good morning, your Honor. 7 Gary Bostwick and Jo-Ann Horn on behalf of the plaintiff. i Dr. Jeffrey R. MacDonald. 8 9 MR. KORNSTEIN: Good morning, your Honor. Daniel Kornstein and Mark Piatt on behalf of the defendant, 10 Joe McGinniss. 11 THE COURT: All right. We want Dr. MacDonald 12 back on the witness stand. 13 MR. KORNSTEIN: I have a few more questions for E* 14 him. 15 THE COURT: All right. Doctor, resume the 16 witness stand, please. E 17 IS JEFFREY R. MAC DONALD - PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS PREVIOUSLY SWORN 1 19 20 THE CLERK: Would you please state your name 21 again for the record. THE WITNESS: My name is Jeffrey R. MacDonald- 22 E THE COURT: You may proceed. 23 24 ///// 25 ///// CROSS-EXAMINATION (RESUMED) 2 BY MR.- KORNSTEIN: a Q When we recessed yesterday, we were going through a 4 series of letters between yourself and Mr. McGinniss about 5 the extent of artistic freedom and independence that 6 Mr. McGinniss had. At the end of the day, there was one 7 document I was about to ask you about. Do you remember a 8 letter from yourself to Mr. McGinniss dated February 9th, 1983, that covered among other things your desire to see 10 a copy of the book? 11 A I don't recall specifically. We talked about that. 12 Q "Would it refresh your recollection if I showed you a 13 copy? 14 A Yes, it would. to 15 MR. KORNSTEIN: Your Honor, may I approach? 16 THE COURT; You may. 17 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see this. 18 BY MR. KORNSTEIN: 19 Q And is it a copy of a letter that you wrote in your 20 own handwriting? 21 A Yes, it is. Q And you signed it? 22 A I did. 23 24 MR. KORNSTEIN: Your Honor, we would move that 25 into evidence as the next exhibit, I believe 159 would be I 1 the number. 2 : THE CLERK: Correct. ? i 3 THE COURT: All right. 4 MR. BOSTWICK: Your 'Honor, I haven't heard that 5 it was sent to Mr- McGinniss, but I believe that that would 6 probably be elicited upon the next question or another, 7 and based upon that we have no objection. 8 BY MR. KORNSTEIN: 9 Q Did you send it? 10 A Yes, I did. 11 THE COURT: All right. It will be received in 12 evidence as 1-5-9- 13 MR. KORNSTEIN: Your Honor, may we put Page 3 14 from that exhibit on the screen? 15 THE COURT: Yes. 16 BY MR. KORNSTEIN: 17 Q Once again, the underlining is not your handwriting. 18 That was added by someone else afterwards; isn't that 19 correct? 20 A . Yes. 21 Q Would you read the underlined portion on the screen? 22 A I want to see where it stops. I can read this easier 23 here. 24 Q All right. It begins on the — 25 A I see it. It stops at "reasons"? 1 Q Yes. 2 A 2nd it begins at "It wa-s one thing"? 3 Q Yes. 4 A "It was one thing not to have control over the book, 5 slash, /contents/, slash,/you. I granted you that and I 6 have lived with it, .except I asked you to treat Sheree 7 well and Jay well for very different reasons." 8 Q Was it your understanding when you wrote those words 9 that you did not have control over the book? 10 A I did not have control over the words that he wrote, E U yes. I 12 Q Was it your understanding that you had no control 13 over the contents of the book? 14 A With the understanding that it was fair and accurate. 15 Q Wasn't it your understanding at that time -that you 16 had no control over him, Mr. McGinniss, as you wrote there? 17 A With the understanding that it was a nonfiction book 18 and fair and accurate. 19 Q Now, recall yesterday we talked about a letter from 20 Mr. McGinniss to you dated May 4th, 1982, in which he was 21 responding to your coiranent about F. Lee Bailey's associate 22 being aghast at your lack of artistic control? 23 A Yes, I remember that. 24 Q And do you remember Mr. McGinniss' explanation and 25 response to you about how he had complete freedom and I 7 M i independence, and how he would never have started the r 2 project with you without that independence and access? 3 Do yot remember that? i 4 A I remember reading that segment, yes. 5 Q And do you also remember a letter Mr. McGinniss sent ! 6 you on August 6th, 1982, which we talked about yesterday 7 and is in evidence as Exhibit 36-K where he says to you to 8 get across to whoever you're talking to that it is not an 9 authorized version, and that he has been operating with 10 complete freedom and independence. Remember those? 11 A Yes, I do. i 12 Q Now, in your letter of August 22nd to Mr. McGinniss, 13 which we covered at the beginning of this series of i© 14 questions yesterday, which was right after or within a few 15 weeks of the August 6th letter that Mr. McGinniss writes 16 to you, and a few months after the May 4th letter; you i 17 didn't repudiate anything that he had said in those letters 18 about the amount of independence and freedom that he had 19 in writing the book; did you? 20 A I'm not sure the letter was in reference — direct 21 reference to that. i 22 Q Whether it was in reference to it or not, you didn't 23 use the August 22nd letter as an occasion to repudiate 24 anything that Mr. McGinniss had said about those subjects. 25 A I'm not sure. I wasn't answering that subject in that I letter, I don't believe. 1 Q Well, does that mean the answer is no, you didn't 2 discuss that subject in the letter? 3 A I'd have to see the letter again to be sure exactly of 4 every word in the letter, but my impression is that letter 5 was responding to something else. 6 Q Well, do you remember this line from the letter, which 7 is Exhibit 116: "I had made myself a promise not to 8 9 question you on the book"? 10 A Yes, I do remember that. 11 Q In any letter during the 4-year period that you and Mr. McGinniss were corresponding, isn't it a fact that U never once did Mr. McGinniss tell you in so many words that 13 he was going to write a book that portrayed you as 14 I* innocent? 15 A Well, I'm not sure of your characterization "in so 16 many words." 17 Q Did the words say in any letter, "I'm going to write IS a book, that portrays you as innocent"? 19 20 A Those exact words? 21 Q Yes. 22 A No. I 23 Q Now, isn't it also true that none of your letters i 24 over that period of time to Mr. McGinniss ever said, "Joe, 25 you're supposed to show me as innocent in this book"? I I 1 A Well, I didn't think that had to be spoken at that 2 t ime.- 3 MR. KORNSTEIN: Move to strike. 4 THE COURT: The answer is stricken. 5 BY MR. KORNSTEIN: 6 Q Is the answer yes or no? 7 A The .question being, were those exact words in any 8 letter of mine to Joe? 9 Q Yes. 10 A I used many phrases that I felt were indicative of 11 how I felt the book would come out. 12 Q_ Did you ever — Well, withdrawn. 13 Isn't it true that you never used the phrase even 14 approximating saying, "The book you're going to write, Joe, 15 will portray me as innocent"? 16 MR. B0.STV7ICK: I object to the question as 17 being vague and ambiguous.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Participant Handbook
    LOWNDES COUNTY DUI COURT PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK STATE COURT OF LOWNDES COUNTY 327 NORTH ASHLEY STREET VALDOSTA, GA 31601 PHONE: 229-671-2895 FAX: 229-671-3441 Lowndes County DUI Court Team: Ellen S. Golden Judge, State Court Cynthia Welch Assistant Solicitor-General Gee Edwards Defense Attorney Stacey Bass Court Coordinator Kayla Porter Probation Officer Laci Rankhorn Treatment Provider Jason Reeves Surveillance Officer Revised 3/1/19 1 | P a g e TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS...........................................................................................................................2 INTRODUCTION TO THE LOWNDES COUNTY STATE COURT DUI COURT.......................... 4 TREATMENT OVERVIEW.................................................................................................................... 6 I. PHASES OF THE DUI COURT PROGRAM........................................................................................7 Phase 1 – (approximately 17 weeks)....................................................................................................7 Phase 2 – (approximately 17 weeks)................................................................................................... 8 Phase 3 – (approximately 17 weeks)................................................................................................... 9 Phase 4 Aftercare- (approximately 3 months)....................................................................................9 Phase Progression.........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • NTP-CERHR Expert Panel Report on the Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity of Amphetamine and Methamphetamine
    Published 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.w Birth Defects Research (Part B) 74:471–584 (2005) NTP-CERHR Expert Panel Report on the Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity Of Amphetamine and Methamphetamine Mari Golub,1 Lucio Costa,2 Kevin Crofton,3 Deborah Frank,4 Peter Fried,5 Beth Gladen6 Rogene Henderson,7 Erica Liebelt,8 Shari Lusskin,9 Sue Marty,10 Andrew Rowland11 John Scialli12 and Mary Vore13 1California Environment Protection Agency, Sacramento, California 2University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 3U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 4Boston Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts 5Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario 6National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 7Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico 8University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Medicine, Birmingham, Alabama 9New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York 10The Dow Chemical Company, Midland, Michigan 11University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico 12Phoenix, Arizona 13University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky PREFACE studies indexed before December 31, 2004. References were also identified from databases such as REPRO- The National Toxicology Program (NTP) and the TOXs, HSDB, IRIS, and DART and from report National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences bibliographies. (NIEHS) established the NTP Center for the Evaluation This evaluation resulted from the efforts of a 13- of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) in June 1998. member panel of government and non-government The purpose of the Center is to provide timely, unbiased, scientists that culminated in a public expert panel scientifically sound evaluations of human and experi- meeting held January 10–12, 2005. This report is a mental evidence for adverse effects on reproduction and product of the Expert Panel and is intended to (1) development caused by agents to which humans may be interpret the strength of scientific evidence that exposed.
    [Show full text]
  • NSDUH MRB Instrumentation Protocol Changes
    Instrumentation Protocol Changes The 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) instrumentation protocols underwent several modifications from the protocols employed for the 2014 NSDUH. A summary of the changes for the 2015 NSDUH can be divided into three topics: (1) the computer-assisted interviewing (CAI) tablet screening instrument, (2) the CAI questionnaire, and (3) the interviewer materials. 1. Screening Instrument Using the 2014 Screening Application as a base, questions, response options, and informed consent wording were modified for the 2015 Screening Application. Listed below are the Screening Application changes for 2015: • As necessary, dates were updated in the screening program. • As necessary, specification updates were made to reflect current tablet screening programming and format. • Response options in the Spanish-language screener have been translated into Spanish. • In the Study Introduction, "Research Triangle Institute" has been replaced with "RTI International," and "U.S. Public Health Service" has been replaced with "U.S. Department of Health and Human Services." • All ePTE data screens were removed. • Field Interviewer (FI) Debriefing Questions were moved from the CAI Questionnaire to the screening tablet, to be administered after leaving the household. They are now documented as "Section 9, FI Debriefing Questions," within the NSDUH Screening Specifications document. 2. CAI Questionnaire Using the 2014 CAI Questionnaire as a base, questions and routing were modified for the 2015 CAI Questionnaire. Listed below are the CAI Questionnaire changes for 2015: Introduction • The CAI instrument version, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number, and OMB expiration date were updated in the Introduction section. • The OMB control number was also updated in the Public Reporting Burden statement.
    [Show full text]
  • 145677NCJRS.Pdf
    ,. "I ~- 1 _ .. If you have issues viewing or accessing this file• contact• us at NCJRS.gov.• a .~ .. A ~-.- .. , , , ... ,T:,: , I " 145677 • • U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating It. Points of vieW or opinions stated In this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this copyrighted material has been gra~~~ti tute for Substance Abuse Research to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the copyright owner. • " , '41!'~- • \..s " t CONTENTS Preface Quiz Parents Schools Marijuana Hashish Hashish Oil Opium Heroin Dilaudid ~2'1:>':'S-t'Jhm~·';"la"·~¥s'"r.':Jt,r;\;~)'!(,"iii,,';~,:j~'i:l;:i~;i~iJ\t:~.. ~~ ,,'~ - H :'" • i' b ":l,' ~~,,] .• :;<",,\/,,::'y,'.P\ '-1';;. ;;~'''1.W'··· .:'t''''';~'l;>;-·:t.lW;i~:\·~/~;~~;;;:~i·' ~ Cocaine Smoking Cocaine Amphetamines/Methamphetamines Clandestine LSD·25 PCP Mescaline Psilocybin· Psilocyn Mushrooms [4zTnhalants~'-',,-'~~--- ~~ Steroids Prescription Drugs Most Abused Designer Drugs The Look-alikes Alcohol Plus Other Drugs Warning Signs of Alcoholism Tobacco Smokeless Tobacco 65 Glossary of Slang Terms 67 References ~~~~~~~----------,.----- The following true story was related by Mrs. Chantal Devine, wife ofthe Honorable Grant Devine, Premier of Saskatchewan, at the PRIDE Canada National Conference on Youth and Drugs in May, 1988 in Ottawa. The story was told to Mrs. Devine by Father Lucien Larre, a priest in Saskatchewan and a founder of Bosco Homes, a home for delinquent boys.
    [Show full text]
  • 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables
    Key Definitions for the 2010 Detailed Tables and National Findings Report This glossary provides definitions for many of the measures and terms used in these tables and in the national findings report1 from the 2010 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH). Where relevant, cross-references also are provided. For some key terms, specific question wording, including "feeder questions" that precede the question(s), is provided for clarity. Abuse Abuse of illicit drugs or alcohol was defined as meeting one or more of the four criteria for abuse included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV)2 and if the definition for dependence was not met for that substance. Additional criteria for alcohol and marijuana abuse include the use of these substances on 6 or more days in the past 12 months. These questions have been included in the survey since 2000. Responses to the dependence or abuse questions based only on the past year use of methamphetamine, Ambien®, Adderall®, or specific hallucinogens from the routing patterns added between 2005 and 2008 were not included in these measures. See Section B.4.2 of Appendix B in the 2010 national findings report for additional details. SEE: "Dependence," "Need for Illicit Drug or Alcohol Use Treatment," and "Prevalence." Adderall® Use Measures of use of the prescription stimulant Adderall® in the respondent's lifetime, the past year, and the past month were developed from responses to the noncore question about recency of use: "Earlier, the computer recorded that you have used Adderall that was not prescribed for you or that you took only for the experience or feeling it caused.
    [Show full text]
  • Putnam County DUI Court Program PARTICIPANT VACATION REQUEST
    PUTNAM COUNTY DUI COURT PROGRAM PARTICIPANT HANDBOOK TABLE OF CONTENTS Welcome ...........................................................................................................................................3 Overview ...........................................................................................................................................3 Confidentiality ...................................................................................................................................3 Fourth Amendment Waiver & Search and Arrest Requirements ......................................................4 DUI Court Hearings ..........................................................................................................................4 Progress Reports ................................................................................................................................5 Termination from DUI Court ............................................................................................................5 Minimum Sanctions ..........................................................................................................................5 Incentives ..........................................................................................................................................6 DUI Court Program Rules .................................................................................................................6 Phases of DUI Court .........................................................................................................................7
    [Show full text]
  • PETITIONERS' EXCERPTS of RECORD VOLUME 1 of 1 Case: 21-70544, 05/14/2021, ID: 12114233, Dktentry: 19, Page 2 of 87
    Case: 21-70544, 05/14/2021, ID: 12114233, DktEntry: 19, Page 1 of 87 No. 21-70544 In the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ADVANCED INTEGRATIVE MEDICAL SCIENCE INSTITUTE, PLLC, DR. SUNIL AGGARWAL, MD, PHD, MICHAL BLOOM, AND ERINN BALDESCHWILER, Petitioners, v. U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION; MERRICK GARLAND, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ATTORNEY GENERAL; AND D. CHRISTOPHER EVANS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS ACTING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE U.S. DRUG ENFORCEMENT ADMINISTRATION, Respondents. PETITIONERS' EXCERPTS OF RECORD VOLUME 1 OF 1 Case: 21-70544, 05/14/2021, ID: 12114233, DktEntry: 19, Page 2 of 87 Kathryn L. Tucker James F. Williams Emerge Law Group Andrew J. Kline 621 SW Morrison Street Thomas J. Tobin Suite 900 Holly Martinez Portland, OR 97205 Perkins Coie LLP Phone: 206.595.0097 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900 [email protected] Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Phone: 206.359.8000 Matthew C. Zorn Fax: 206.359.9000 Yetter Coleman LLP [email protected] 811 Main Street, Suite 4100 [email protected] Houston, Texas 77002 [email protected] Phone: 713.632.8000 [email protected] Fax: 713.632.8002 [email protected] Shane Pennington Vicente Sederberg LLP 1115 Broadway, 12th Floor New York, NY 10010 Phone: 917.338.5455 Fax: 303.860.4504 [email protected] m Attorneys for Petitioners Case: 21-70544, 05/14/2021, ID: 12114233, DktEntry: 19, Page 3 of 87 INDEX Docket Document Date Vol. Page N/A Petitioners’ Request for Guidance 1/15/21 1 4 from Drug Enforcement Administration N/A Drug Enforcement Administration --/--/21 1 8 Determination [Undated] N/A Declaration of Michal Bloom 4/5/21 1 10 N/A Declaration of Erinn Baldeschwiler 4/5/21 1 18 N/A Declaration of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • United States District Cour for the Eastern District of North Carolina Western Division
    UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 3:75-CR-26-F No. 5:06-CV-24-F UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) GOVERNMENT’S v. ) POST-HEARING MEMORANDUM ) JEFFREY R. MacDONALD, ) Movant ) The United States of America, by and through the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of North Carolina, hereby submits this Post-Hearing Memorandum in accordance with this Court’s Order of September 27, 2012 [DE-305], and respectfully shows unto the Court the following: Table of Contents I. Summary of Argument ......................................................................................... 1 II. Facts adduced at the evidentiary hearing .............................................................. 2 A. Helena Stoeckley at the 1979 trial .................................................................. 2 B. Stoeckley’s 1982 statements to her mother .................................................. 19 C. Jimmy Britt ................................................................................................... 20 1. Personal life .................................................................................... 20 2. The Britt affidavits .......................................................................... 22 D. FBI interview of Jerry Leonard ..................................................................... 27 E. Affidavit of the elder Helena Stoeckley ........................................................ 27 F. Other events prior to evidentiary hearing ....................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2014 NSDUH Field Interviewer Manual September 2013 I Table of Contents Table of Contents (Continued)
    2014 NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH Field Interviewer Manual Field Interviewer Computer Manual Contract No. HHSS283201300001C Project No. 0213757 Prepared for: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Rockville, Maryland 20857 Prepared by: Research Triangle Institute September 2013 Field Interviewer:__________________________________________ FI ID No:__________________ 2014 NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH Field Interviewer Manual Contract No. HHSS283201300001C Project No. 0213757 Prepared for: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Rockville, Maryland 20857 Prepared by: Research Triangle Institute September 2013 2014 NATIONAL SURVEY ON DRUG USE AND HEALTH Field Interviewer Manual Contract No. HHSS283201300001C Project No. 0213757 Prepared for: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Rockville, Maryland 20857 Prepared by: Research Triangle Institute September 2013 Research Triangle Institute MISSION To improve the human condition by turning knowledge into practice. VISION To be the world’s leading independent research organization, recognized for solving critical social and scientific problems. VALUES Integrity - We perform with the highest ethical standards of individual and group honesty. We communicate openly and realistically with each other and with our clients. Excellence - We strive to deliver results with exceptional quality and value. Innovation - We encourage multidisciplinary collaboration, creativity and independent thinking in everything we do. Respect for the Individual - We treat one another fairly, with dignity and equity. We support each other to develop to our full potential. Respect for RTI - We recognize that the strength of RTI International lies in our commitment, collectively and individually, to RTI’s vision, mission, values, strategies and practices. Our commitment to the Institute is the foundation for all other organizational commitments.
    [Show full text]
  • Protecting Children in Substance-Abusing Families
    If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. National Ce~'ter on Child Abuse and Neglect Protecting Children in Substance-Abusing Families The lJser Manual Series U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES Administration for Children and Families Administration on Children, Youth and Families National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect Protecting Children in Substance-Abusing Families Vickie Kropenske and Judy Howard with Cheryl Breitenbach Richard Dembo Susan B. Edelstein Kathy McTaggart Annette Moore Mary Beth Sorensen Virginia Weisz 1994 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Administration for Children and Families Administration on Children, Youth and Families National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect This manual, and other manuals in the series, are available from: The Clearinghouse on Child Abuse and Neglect Information P.O. Box 1182 Washington, D.C. 20013 146951 U.S. Department of Justice National Institute of Justice This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this material has been granted by I..' Public Domain/U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services to the National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission of the ~ owner. This manual was developed and produced
    [Show full text]
  • Spons Agency Pub Date
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 054 483 CG 006 613 TITLE Rasource Book for Drug Abuse information. INSTIT TION American A_-3sociation tor Health, Physical Educatiom and Pecreation, washington, D.C.: National Sciance Teachers Association, Washington, D.C. SPONS AGENCY National Inst. of Mental Health (DHEW), Bethesda, Ni. PUB DATE Oct 69 NOTE 123p. AVAILABLE FROM superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 ($1.25) EDRS P ICE MF-$0.'-)5 HC-$6.59 DESCR1 mORS *Drug Abuse; Drug Addiction; Drug Legislation; Drug Therapy; Educational Programs; *Health Education: Inservice Education; Inservice Programs; *Inservice Teacher Education; Lysergic Acid Diethylamide; Marihuana; Narcotics; *Social Problems; Student School Relationship; Student Teacher Relationship; Teacher Responsibility; Youth; *Youth Problems ABSTRACT The bulk of this book is divided into 3 major sections: (1) teaching about drugs; (2) facts about drugs; and (3) supplementary reports which deal with legal aspects, prevention, drug use-student value correlations, motivation, etc. The section concerned with teaching about drugs provides concrete suggestions for elementary and secondary educators, as well as administrators. Much of the focus is on communication with youth. Facts are presented about marihuana, amphetamines, barbiturates, LSD, and heroin. In addition, there are discUssions about drug dependence, One paper on pharmacologic therapy tor narcotic-dependent persons, and a fact sheet on tederal drug laws. Two shorter sections, which conclude the book, consider the use of films in drug abuse education and, in a somewhat ditterent vein, discuss the essential components of an inservice drug edrcation workshop. An annotated list of movies and a bibliography of selected references are included.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of Research with Benzedrine, Dexedrine, and Ritalin on the Hyperkinetic Behavior Syndrome
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Master's Theses Graduate College 4-1974 A Review of Research with Benzedrine, Dexedrine, and Ritalin on the Hyperkinetic Behavior Syndrome William J. Hampstead Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses Part of the Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy Commons Recommended Citation Hampstead, William J., "A Review of Research with Benzedrine, Dexedrine, and Ritalin on the Hyperkinetic Behavior Syndrome" (1974). Master's Theses. 2539. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2539 This Masters Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A REVIEW CF RESEARCH WITH BENZEDRINE, DEXEDRINE, AND RITALIN ON THE HYPERKINETIC BEHAVIOR SYNDROME by William J. Hampstead A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Graduate College in partial fulfillment of the Degree of Master of Arts Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan April 1974 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. DJTRODUCTION Chemotherapy is a term applied to the use of a medicinal drug with the intent of alleviating a diagnosed acute illness or chronic disease. As applied to a form of therapeutic intervention directed toward children exhibiting the symptomatology of the hyperkinetic behavior syndrome, chemotherapy appears to have been a relatively hit or miss affair. Consequently, the concept of a medicinal drug in relation to these children has been severely criticized by various segments of society who have a personal interest in the subject, such as teachers, parents, and physicians.
    [Show full text]