COLUMN UNBALANCED

Article Misleading

Editor:

Re: Cops can now "take your stuff" by Mindelle Jacobs

This was, without doubt, one of the most unbalanced and misleading
editorial pieces I have read for a long time; the kind designed to
drive a wedge of mistrust between the police and the very people they
serve. The vast majority, those who voluntarily comply with the law
and work hard to support themselves and their families, have little
or no contact with police. As a result, their impressions of the
police and what they do is largely formed by the media and editorials
such as this.

"Cops can now take your stuff" would lead one to believe that there
is some sinister plot formed by police to take property from the law
abiding citizens we serve. This is untrue and is an insult to those
who work hard to dismantle organized crime in our province everyday.
To start, the assets seized go to the province, not the police as she
boldly indicates. This is one of the primary differences between the
legislation in Canada and the U. S., for example, where police have
directly seized and taken possession of criminal assets for decades.

How about a more realistic editorial title on the subject? Perhaps
with a heading like New legislation "angers organized criminals".

Instead of citing a case like the family car being seized because a
wayward son is dealing drugs, how about a case where the police are
realistically likely to commit the resources necessary to cause
forfeiture under this legislation.

Something like a person with a drug trafficking record, identified as
the owner of multiple properties used to cultivate hundreds of
thousands or millions of dollars worth of illicit drugs; the same
drugs that are sold in our high schools and on our streets. Although
this person has never held gainful employment or paid income tax,
their personal assets would be the envy of most. In addition, they
carefully manipulate to ensure they insulate themselves from the
prospect of a criminal conviction.

In the past these crooks were allowed to keep their spoils and
shamelessly carry on.

By contrast, if an investigation causes a forfeiture order to be
granted by a judge in cases like this, I'll bet the vast majority of
law abiding Canadians would cast a smile of approval.

Steven Starr

Municipality of Meaford