JUDGE STIFTEL WARNED ABOUT NEW DRUG LAWS

When his life is memorialized later this month, let's hope that some of his
celebrants will go beyond fond anecdotes and will recall his willingness to
pinpoint problems he saw in Delaware's system of justice.

When he and I spoke in 1990 on the eve of his retirement after 32 years as
a Delaware judge, Stiftel was forceful in candidly citing the problems he
and other judges have faced under the constraints imposed upon them by
mandatory sentences for drug offenses. The same problems continue because
neither governors nor the General Assembly have been willing to risk
potential political fallout by moderating punitive laws that do little to
shrink the problem and succeed only in expanding prisons.

With neither current gubernatorial candidate offering a solution to the
problem, and with the lack of real choices Delawareans have in next month's
legislative elections, the odds are that the outdated philosophy in Dover
will not change. That makes Stiftel's cautions just as vital today as when
his interview was printed exactly 10 years before his death last month at
age 82.

Overcrowd the prisons

The drug court Delaware has instituted has done a little to reach out to
addicts and others who might be helped by treatment. But the arbitrariness
of mandating prison sentences for a few grams of cocaine, said Stifel,
meant for example that he had to give three years in prison for a minor
offense to a woman who had three children, for whom a home had to be found.

The humanitarian in Stiftel was evident as he said, "Not every person is
alike. I feel sometimes I would like to keep a person from going to jail
because they've changed radically or their position as accomplice was
minimal or their education level is such that they didn't really understand
what they're going into. I'd like to have the opportunity to study the case
and the person and determine how he or she should be treated. If the
mandatory sentence divests me of that opportunity, I feel very badly about
it." Stiftel added that he takes all cases personally and thinks about them
seven days a week.

He worried particularly about what prisons do to people convicted of minor
drug charges, who are then forced to associate with vicious murderers and
rapists. How many of them become lost souls, he wondered. And how many drug
kingpins get away with their crimes while their customers and agents go to
jail. In effect, though, mandatory sentences mean the General Assembly not
judges make the decisions, "then I can't make a judgment that's wrong,"
taking him off the hook. Stiftel said he has respect for the legislators
because they think they are doing the people's will but the results may be
just the opposite of what is intended. "Perhaps there ought to be a
feasibility study on the effect of what they're doing," Stiftel suggested.

Whether such a study or any information would sway the Tom Sharps of this
world is doubtful. Only a few prominent Delawareans, like Ned Carpenter,
Vic Battaglia and Russ Peterson, have spoken out strongly against our
present failing system. But no greater tribute could be paid to Al Stiftel
than to listen to his words of wisdom.