DENY DRUG DEALERS THEIR ILLICIT EARNINGS

The issue: A state prosecutor goes after alleged drug proceeds to keep
it from being used to post bail.

Our opinion: Going after the money is an effective crime-fighting
tactic that should be used more widely.

We have some carefully chosen words for the prosecutor who wants to
deny an Exeter Township man accused of manufacturing methamphetamine
the use of any ill-gotten gains to post bail: Go for the money.

In fact, we hope the cash-grabbing strategy in the Michael Spadafora
case, dubbed "Operation Underground" by state prosecutors, can be more
widely applied.

Spadafora, who remains in Berks County Prison in lieu of $1 million
bail, is one of four suspects arrested Oct. 16 after raids on what
authorities described as a $9 million meth-making operation in Berks.
Of special note, police found a life-size cardboard cutout of a
policeman at Spadafora's house that had been used for target practice
- - with bullet holes through the heart.

Judge Jeffrey H. Schmehl, acting at the request of state Deputy
Attorney General Robert D. Rosner, ordered that a hearing be scheduled
to make sure Spadafora cannot use any proceeds from illegal activities
to post bail.

We wish prosecutors at all levels could apply the tactic. Although the
Spadafora case is particularly alarming, illegal drug traffic as a
whole poses a major threat to law-enforcement officers and to
neighborhoods.

The $60 billion, according to government estimates, spent on illegal
drugs in this country every year fuels a lot of the violence. It is
the lifeblood of the amorphous but well-functioning networks that lead
all the way from our neighborhoods to drug-producing areas in this
county and around the world, and it finances legions of gunmen ready
and eager to kill for the sake of control.

Facing such an enduring and powerful adversary, we must use every
weapon in our arsenal to keep suppliers and manufacturers of dangerous
substances out of action. It's essential to keep that money from being
used to benefit criminals.

Yes, every accused person is presumed innocent until found guilty, but
money legally earned can be accounted for by receipts, pay stubs,
checks from clients, etc. If a person can't account for money, and if
law enforcement officials can show that it likely came from unlawful
activities, the funds can be frozen until a court decides its final
disposition.

Seizing anybody's property - even that of an accused felon - is a
serious matter, but checks and balances are in place. To take
possession of money supposedly involved in illicit drug activity,
prosecutors must go before a judge in civil court and prove by a
preponderance of evidence that the proceeds were derived from the
illicit activity or would be used in it.

But while federal and state prosecutors routinely seize money and
other property, county officials seldom have that luxury. They simply
lack the resources to do so.

We understand their predicament: Local offices must balance their
priorities. But an argument could be made, especially in counties with
very active drug-trafficking networks, that forfeited drug money would
finance the personnel to follow the money and choke off the financial
stream that keeps illegal drugs flowing. Currently, such money goes to
local police, who certainly can use it, but expanded financial powers
could help prosecutors nab criminals who slip the noose on drug charges.

After all, the infamous Chicago racketeer Al Capone, bootlegger and
orchestrator of the St. Valentine's Day massacre, among countless
other crimes, wound up in Alcatraz for income tax evasion, not for
racketeering or murder. Evading state income tax is illegal, too. If
society has a weapon at its disposal that could bring down a mobster
as notorious Capone, we should use it for all it's worth.