PROPOSED RACHEL'S LAW HAS GOOD INTENTIONS, BUT IS IT PRACTICAL

No one wants what happened to an inexperienced undercover informant
named Rachel Hoffman to ever happen again.

Not police, who say using such informants is critical to making drug
cases. Not prosecutors. And obviously not well-meaning legislators
pushing for a "Rachel's Law" to set state standards for informants in
criminal investigations.

But does this best-of-intentions bill in her name go too
far?

Hoffman, a 23-year-old Florida State graduate, was murdered last year
while working with Tallahassee police. She was in a supervised drug
court program when officers found marijuana and pills in her
apartment, and agreed to go undercover for consideration in her own
case.

But Hoffman was inexperienced, untrained and unprepared for the
dangerous path they set her on. A grand jury later called her immature
and "way over her head." She was supposed to buy ecstasy, cocaine and
a gun from two convicted felons. She went alone, carrying $13,000.

The sting could not have gone more wrong. Police lost contact. They
didn't find her body for two days.

Now we have the pending Rachel's Law sponsored by Sen. Mike Fasano of
New Port Richey and fellow Republican Rep. Peter Nehr of Tarpon
Springs. No question, the bill contains sensible requirements for
using informants: among them, police training, mandatory consideration
of an informant's age, stability and experience, a specific written
agreement and a chance to consult a lawyer first.

But the law would also require the local state attorney (and in some
cases, judge) to approve all deals ahead of time, a potentially bad
blurring of the lines between the distinct roles of police and
prosecutors. (Contrary to your average Law & Order episode, the two
have separate jobs and routinely disagree on, for example, the proper
charges someone should face.)

Veteran police I talked with said in drug cases, things can move fast, catch
a guy with drugs, flip him and get the dealer before everyone disappears.

"Some of (the bill) makes all the sense in the world," says Tampa
police Chief Steve Hogue. "But some of it is a little problematic in
that the bill wasn't written with real police work, particularly
narcotics work, in mind."

Prosecutors have their own reservations. Pinellas-Pasco State Attorney
Bernie McCabe says the law as is could reduce the number of
confidential informants substantially.

"You're going to seriously curtail enforcement of our drug laws with
this legislation," says Hillsborough State Attorney Mark Ober. "This
is not a viable solution to this terrible event."

Coming from the ones in the trenches, that makes sense.

The good news: Sen. Fasano says he's all for working with them as the
bill moves forward. "I hope they respect the purpose of why we're
doing this legislation, so we save the life of another young person,"
he says. And maybe that's the best point of all.

How we use informants, "use" being the key word here , deserves a
hard look after what happened to Rachel Hoffman. She and the parents
who survive her deserve that. And the final version of any law in her
name should be considered, workable, practical and most of all, effective.