Tax Subsidies for Drug Dealers, Gangsters, Bureaucrats, and Terrorists

Is there anyone with a functioning brain who thinks this is a good use of money? Great article from the LA Times:

The United States has been spending $69 billion a year worldwide for the last 40 years, for a total of $2.5 trillion, on drug prohibition -- with little to show for it. Is anyone actually benefiting from this war? Six groups come to mind.

The first group are the drug lords in nations such as Colombia, Afghanistan and Mexico, as well as those in the United States. They are making billions of dollars every year -- tax free.

The second group are the street gangs that infest many of our cities and neighborhoods, whose main source of income is the sale of illegal drugs.

Third are those people in government who are paid well to fight the first two groups. Their powers and bureaucratic fiefdoms grow larger with each tax dollar spent to fund this massive program that has been proved not to work.

Fourth are the politicians who get elected and reelected by talking tough -- not smart, just tough -- about drugs and crime. But the tougher we get in prosecuting nonviolent drug crimes, the softer we get in the prosecution of everything else because of the limited resources to fund the criminal justice system.

The fifth group are people who make money from increased crime. They include those who build prisons and those who staff them. The prison guards union is one of the strongest lobbying groups in California today, and its ranks continue to grow.

And last are the terrorist groups worldwide that are principally financed by the sale of illegal drugs.

Who are the losers in this war? Literally everyone else, especially our children.

Guilty before proven innocent, thuggish prosecution tactics by the feds

The Kaleys simply want to use their own money to retain counsel of choice to defend them at trial," said one of their attorneys, Howard Srebnick of Black Srebnick Kornspan & Stumpf in Miami. "The government is interfering by freezing their assets, including the equity in the home they purchased more than a decade ago, without giving the Kaleys an opportunity pre-trial to confront witnesses and present evidence to establish they have committed no crime."

The Kaleys set aside about $1 million to pay attorneys by taking out a second home mortgage and cashing certificates of deposit. But prosecutors claimed the money was ill-gotten gains. They charged Kerri Kaley stored the medical equipment in the family's garage. Her husband was indicted after she refused a plea deal. Prosecutors said he knew about the conspiracy and managed the illegal profits.

On the face of it, this charge is absurd. As one commentator at the WSJ law blog asks, “he defendants make a good argument under the 5th and 6th. How can the government freeze assets BEFORE proving they were “ill-gotten”? That’s crazy!” In other words, in these cases, guilt is assumed.

Like many other corruptions of civil liberties, asset seizures got their start in drug cases:

Miami criminal defense lawyer Jane Moscowitz, who’s representing Miami criminal defense lawyer Ben Kuehne against money laundering charges, says that bad rulings in drug cases “eventually come and pollute the prosecution of white-collar cases.”

The linked article also touches on the cost of defending white collar charges. Just for document review alone costs are over one million dollars. We touched on how costs can affect the decision to settle in earlier posts. What chance does an individual stand against the resources of the state? Almost none, which is why no matter what the charge is, the only options for most people, is to cut a deal. Almost no one can afford justice; any win would be a pyrrhic one.

More DOJ Idiocy - Now They Attack Lawyers

Is there any Shakespeare line used out of context more than Dick in Henry Vi’s “first thing we’ll do, let’s kill all the lawyer”? In the context of the play it is clear the line is used to express the yearnings of the ignorant masses as they mistake anarchy for freedom. Dick the butcher sees the rights of man and the legal process, as standing in the way of his glorious rebellion. The line is a warning against anarchy; it’s not a society that anyone would want to live in.

What would happen if lawyers were not able to vigorously represent their client? If the State turned from prosecution suspected criminals to going after their lawyers? When the legal process is subverted for expediency then justice is perverted.

This is the case with Miami lawyer Ben Kuehne who has been indicted on money laundering charges by the DOJ. Since they can’t kill the lawyers, throwing them in jail must be their next best alternative:

Taking the podium, Kuehne waited for the rousing applause to die down, and then began his acceptance speech with a brief discourse on the importance of justice. “The U.S. is fortunate that our system of justice is premised on the ability of the people to rely upon the advocacy of lawyers,” he said. “Our constitution guarantees that right, a right that is at the core of our system of justice.”

Kuehne spoke not only to his audience of criminal defense lawyers, but also to his case, which some say sends a discouraging message to lawyers who take large fees for defending drug dealers. Roy Black, the lawyer who represented Ochoa Vasquez in the underlying drug case, made $5.2 million; Kuehne, hired by Black to vet the funds used to pay Black’s fee, made $200,000.

Kuehne went on to allude to John Adams, “a patriot who was called a traitor” for defending British soldiers who were charged after the Boston Massacre, and former Supreme Court Justice, Hugo Black, who said that a democratic society requires lawyers who will defend unpopular clients and causes. “We live in a time that is not kind to the justice system,” said Kuehne, “when the right to counsel is under attack, when those who oppose government overreaching are viewed as trouble. Today, it’s a recurring problem that, within government circles, lawyers are the problem.”

A 'Wire' war vs. the drug war

An excellent and sensible Op/Ed by the creators of HBO's "The Wire."

If enough members of the public signal their disapproval of a law by refusing to enforce it, they might bring about its repeal. That's a happy thought, as long as it is not taken too far. As a rule, it still is better to pass laws in legislatures than in courtrooms.

It is also a good idea, before releasing people for non-violent offenses, to check to see whether they have histories as violent offenders and tendencies to do it again. Many do.

Yet, there is much that we should do to help today's at-risk youth and small-time criminals avoid becoming big-time criminals. For example, we can support neighborhood programs, many of which are church-based, that do a good job of putting kids on the right road. After all, the one thing that is so unsettling about the wasted lives portrayed on "The Wire" is our knowledge that they're not all fiction.

Cops can now legally inflict permanant damage on you to draw blood if you are accused of DUI.

Ignoring logic and common sense, NJ courts have ruled:

Police may inflict permanent physical damage while forcibly taking blood from a motorist accused of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI), according to a decision by the appellate division of the New Jersey Superior Court. The court on Tuesday found that police officers from Washington and Hamilton Townships did nothing wrong when they held down Russell Johnston in such a way that his wrist suffered permanent nerve damage as a nurse from Robert Wood Johnson Hospital took his blood.

MADD went to far over a decade ago. This obsession with busting DUIers causes more harm than good.

"Respect is money, money is power and power is masculinity"

This is an excellent SF Gate article on the cycle of violence. It’s one of the best shorts descriptions I’ve read about why things are the way they are. Parts of it sound like something Tom Wolfe would write about manliness.

In this world, challenges cannot be left unanswered. A boy who is jumped, robbed or insulted and doesn't respond is labeled "soft," or a "punk" or a "bitch." He becomes prey. Once he is perceived as weak, the attacks keep coming. He loses not only his honor, but his friends and his personal safety, until he fights back and wins - sometimes via homicide.
…

"It fulfills that ego, gives you a sense of identity. Big dudes respect you. It's like being a star athlete - kids in constructive environments, their peers give them accolades and support to continue their good behavior by bolstering their ego. It's identical in the streets, only the behavior that is rewarded is different. It's like, 'Hey! I saw you in a stolen car!' and you get a high five."

Respect is money, money is power and power is masculinity. Violence defines you as a man.

"These kids have one thing in this world, and when you have nothing else, no money, no access, no privileges, no resources, no means, the only thing you have, from a little boy on, is your respect," investigator Gandy said.

Supreme Court Crack Cocaine Victory

Besides the obvious racial disparity, it is clear that mandatory minimums are a bad idea. More info from the NY Times:

In a racially sensitive issue, the justices overturned a U.S. appeals court ruling that judges cannot hand down a lighter punishment simply because they disagree with wide disparities for crack and powder cocaine sentences.

Blacks account for about 80 percent of the federal crack cocaine convictions. The guidelines call for lighter prison terms for the sale of powder cocaine, a drug more popular with whites and Hispanics.

In a related ruling, the court also supported the right of judges to depart from sentencing guidelines in a case involving distribution of the drug ecstasy.

Now Gestures Are Crimes

Just asking if someone is a police officer is considered a crime as well. These bureaucrats are beyond satire:

Simple body language can now send known prostitutes and their johns to jail in West Virginia's second largest city.

Under the new law, suspects can be arrested for beckoning passers-by with conversation, attempting to stop traffic by waving their arms, circling an area in a vehicle or trying to stop pedestrians. An arrest can also be made if a suspect asks if a potential prostitute or patron is a police officer.

What is the root of such idiocy? The "drug war" of course:

"It's not going to eradicate prostitution, because it has been with us since the existence of time,'' said Huntington Mayor David Felinton. "But where prostitution and the drug trade are so closely tied together, I think it will be another tool for us to use.''

2nd Circuit Removed Judge Over Sentencing

We talked before about how little control judges have over sentencing here. Judge John T. Elfvin has now been removed from a case for exercising discretion during sentencing.

A federal appeals court has sharply criticized a judge for repeatedly ignoring the requirements of the sentencing guidelines and once again has removed him from a case.
...
Judges Ralph Winter, John Walker and Robert Sack said in United States v. Benjamin, 05-3677-cr, that "the need to remove Judge Elfvin from this case" was "self-evident." Winter wrote for the panel.

Bureaucrats don’t like disobedient bureaucrats.

Judges cannot be counted on for reasonableness; they have the same pay master as the prosecutors. The jury exists as a bulwark against draconian sentences for this very reason.

When the Jury is Prevented from Knowing the Law

How can justice be served when the jury is prevented from knowing the defendants side of the story? Even more unconscionable is when the law is on their side and the judge prevents the jury from hearing that information. Newreview.com takes a look at a federal marijuana case and includes an honest nullification discussion:

He was less generous whenever the defense tried to bring in what they felt was at the heart of the case: Proposition 215 and the fact that the people of California had rejected federal law and adopted their own medical-marijuana law.

He also struck legitimate considerations:

Indeed, Judge Damrell told Serra he had “crossed the line” after Serra asked the jury to consider that the case was biased, a political prosecution emanating from Washington, D.C. Such bias, he said, constituted reasonable doubt.

The couple was convicted in less than three hours and will appeal. The penalties are absurdly harsh, and enough by themselves to cause any thinking man to nullify:

The defense says there were never 100 plants at any one time. Remember, the DEA only found 34 when they raided the couple’s home, which they argue is consistent with the “reasonable personal use” provisions of Proposition 215. But federal law allows the jury to add up all the plants that were grown “over the course of the conspiracy,” in this case three years.

The Nation on Incarceration in the US

Nonviolent drug offenses involving trafficking or possession (the modern equivalent of rum-running or getting caught with a bottle of bathtub gin) accounted for 31 percent of the total...

Inevitably a single conviction leads to economic disenfranchisement and, no surprise, leaves the offender working in the extra-legal economy. Even a rehabilitated offender has little chance of finding legitimate employment.

The white applicant with a prison record was half as likely to be called back for a second interview as the white applicant without. But the black applicant without a criminal record was no more likely to be called back than the white applicant with a record, while the black applicant with a record was two-thirds less likely to be called back than the black applicant without.

The drug war has created a permanent underclass of citizens and has done nothing to stem the flow of drugs. In fact, prices are lower then ever. Not to mention that the war is unbelievably expensive, costing tax payers over $40 Billion per year an estimated $40,000 for every drug arrest.