Opinion
No. 00 CR 737
June 6, 2002
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Defendant Turcotte is charged with conspiracy to sell various misbranded and controlled substances, and with possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance analogue. The government has, it claims, evidence that in furtherance of the conspiracy defendant's co-conspirator sold Zen to the husband of April Bolling, and she thereafter died from an overdose of Zen. Defendant moves to exclude evidence of April Bolling's death. That motion is, for now, granted.
The government quite correctly points out that its experts will testify that the substances here involved can have significant adverse physiological effects, including death, and the jury is surely entitled to know why those substances are illegal. But defendant is not charged with the death of April Bolling and, unless defendant takes the position that Zen is harmless or beneficial or at least not unduly harmful, we fail to see how evidence of that death advances the government's case. On the other hand, the jury's knowledge that someone died could be unduly prejudicial to defendant.
Defendant also moves to exclude references to "ecstasy" and "date rape drug." The government counters by representing that GHB, GBL and BD are commonly referred to as "club drugs," and ecstasy is but another of those drugs, and all are covered by the Date-Rape Drug Prohibition Act of 2000. We have no doubt that government experts will testify that GHB, GBL and BD pose the danger of non-consensual sex, often being ingested at clubs or parties, which leads to their being described as "dub drugs." We see no particular prejudice to defendant by a passing reference to ecstasy being of a similar nature, as that relationship may be helpful to the jury's understanding of the nature of the substances. We see no particular reason, however, why they need to be described as "date rape" drugs. The motion is granted in part and denied in part.