News (Media Awareness Project) - US CT: News Briefs, Busted! |
Title: | US CT: News Briefs, Busted! |
Published On: | 2000-03-09 |
Source: | New Haven Advocate (CT) |
Fetched On: | 2008-09-05 01:06:37 |
BUSTED!
In contrast to his shock of silver hair, David X. Sullivan's face looked
even redder. No surprise, considering it was his first debate. As a
self-proclaimed "fed," an assistant U.S. Attorney in New Haven, he had a
lot of explaining to do during a recent panel debate sponsored by the
Connecticut Civil Liberties Union.
The subject was civil asset forfeiture, a legal maneuver that allows law
enforcement to seize someone's car, house, land or even cash on suspicion
that the property is drug-related. Officials can charge the property with a
crime without ever needing probable cause to charge its owner. The owner
then has to hire a lawyer, post 10 percent of the property's value and sue
to get it back.
Panelists at the Feb. 23 Yale Political Union debate clashed over pending
legislation to reform current laws, making civil asset forfeiture harder to
use.
Proponents of reform blew hole after hole through Sullivan's arguments.
Among other things, they said civil forfeiture contributes to racial
profiling, gives police an incentive to seize expensive stuff (which the
cops get to keep) and requires the property's owner to prove innocence,
rather than the government to prove guilt. In his opening statements,
Graham Boyd of the American Civil Liberties Union described civil asset
forfeiture as a "confluence of racism, greed and corruption."
A line gradually formed behind the audience microphone as Sullivan and
fellow fed Mark Kaczynski, of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency's Hartford
office, tried to defend their position. Forfeiture is a powerful tool
against drug lords, with "minuscule" corruption, Kaczynski said. He
believes more forfeitures would make the program better.
"What if you seized all the drug property in the state?" asked Jerry Ravard
of Stratford. After a few seconds of silence, Sullivan asked: "All of it?"
Then he acknowledged that new drug dealers would move in, perpetuating the
cycle.
"Then why are you doing it?" quipped High Times photographer Preston Peet.
Sullivan's face said it all: Busted!
In contrast to his shock of silver hair, David X. Sullivan's face looked
even redder. No surprise, considering it was his first debate. As a
self-proclaimed "fed," an assistant U.S. Attorney in New Haven, he had a
lot of explaining to do during a recent panel debate sponsored by the
Connecticut Civil Liberties Union.
The subject was civil asset forfeiture, a legal maneuver that allows law
enforcement to seize someone's car, house, land or even cash on suspicion
that the property is drug-related. Officials can charge the property with a
crime without ever needing probable cause to charge its owner. The owner
then has to hire a lawyer, post 10 percent of the property's value and sue
to get it back.
Panelists at the Feb. 23 Yale Political Union debate clashed over pending
legislation to reform current laws, making civil asset forfeiture harder to
use.
Proponents of reform blew hole after hole through Sullivan's arguments.
Among other things, they said civil forfeiture contributes to racial
profiling, gives police an incentive to seize expensive stuff (which the
cops get to keep) and requires the property's owner to prove innocence,
rather than the government to prove guilt. In his opening statements,
Graham Boyd of the American Civil Liberties Union described civil asset
forfeiture as a "confluence of racism, greed and corruption."
A line gradually formed behind the audience microphone as Sullivan and
fellow fed Mark Kaczynski, of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency's Hartford
office, tried to defend their position. Forfeiture is a powerful tool
against drug lords, with "minuscule" corruption, Kaczynski said. He
believes more forfeitures would make the program better.
"What if you seized all the drug property in the state?" asked Jerry Ravard
of Stratford. After a few seconds of silence, Sullivan asked: "All of it?"
Then he acknowledged that new drug dealers would move in, perpetuating the
cycle.
"Then why are you doing it?" quipped High Times photographer Preston Peet.
Sullivan's face said it all: Busted!
Member Comments |
No member comments available...