TAKING MAN'S HOME A POOR ANSWER

Kamloops - Nicodemo Bruzzese is a 52-year-old drug addict. Sometimes
he sells drugs as well, to support his destructive habit. He's been
busted many, many times over the years, for a variety of minor offences.

In most of his court appearances, his long-time defence lawyer Rob
Bruneau has also told the court Bruzzese suffered a serious head
injury more than two decades ago, after he was in a bad car accident.
That injury seems to have robbed Bruzzese of some of his judgment, his
common sense, his ability to say no to people and to stand up for
himself, judges have been told.

Many of his legal problems have been caused by the fact he is easily
manipulated by others and is vulnerable, his lawyer has said. He's an
easy mark in a brutal world.

One significant detail separated Bruzzese from other crack addicts. He
owned a home. It was bequeathed to him a few years ago by his father,
who wanted to provide some security for his dysfunctional son.

Bruzzese lost his home Wednesday. It was ordered forfeited to the
state after he pleaded guilty to selling an undercover officer small
amounts of cocaine - about $400 worth in all - on five occasions in
2008.

His lawyer and the federal Crown prosecutor told B.C. Supreme Court
Justice Richard Blair that Bruzzese consented to the forfeiture. The
joint submission saw him released from jail after serving seven months
of pre-trial custody (the legal equivalent of a 14-month jail
sentence). The loss of his $255,000 home - he owned it free and clear
- - saved him extra time in jail, perhaps as much as six or seven
months, which is all he likely would have served, considering how our
jail system works.

Justice Blair agreed the sentence is a significant punishment for
Bruzzese, who had allowed the house to deteriorate into a
neighbourhood crack shack used by addicts, prostitutes and other drug
dealers as a base and a refuge.

"What he did was offer a safe haven for any number of drug addicts,
conduct neither the court nor the community can condone. The removal
of the property from his possession will eliminate a (neighbourhood)
problem," said Blair.

Bruzzese was released to the street Thursday with nowhere to go. He is
homeless, thanks to recent laws and court decisions that endorse
forfeiture of private property in instances where it is central to the
commission of crime.

The trouble is, Bruzzese is not the kind of criminal I suspect
Parliament or judges envisioned when they approved such
forfeitures.

And I can't help but feel Bruzzese did no differently in court
Wednesday than he's done so many times over the years. He said yes
when it was not in his best interests to do so. He didn't say no when
he needed to, nor did he stand up for himself when it counted.

He agreed to give up the most substantial asset he had - something
that offered him at least the hope of security and a better life - for
a really questionable reason. He got walked over, one more time.

Most property forfeitures I've seen have been of properties used to
grow marijuana. In almost all the cases, homes or barns and sheds
housed significant commercial grow-ops capable of producing hundreds
of thousands in illegal profit.

Those properties were often mortgaged to the hilt, with minimal
investments of cash made by the owners. They were not residences, but
marijuana factories.

Bruzzese's house was once a home, his parents' home, where he and his
siblings were raised. The court acknowledged as much by agreeing to
allow the man one last entry to retrieve his personal effects and a
lifetime of possessions with family sentimental value.

While it may have become a crack shack, the house at 861 Nicolani Dr.
was not a commercial enterprise. It was a squalid, pathetic den of
despair. If Bruzzese sold drugs from it, inevitably he was motivated
to do so by addiction, not profit. He gained so little from the
lifestyle he was leading there.

Inevitably, the fact he was such a fat pigeon made it easy for the
alley cats to manipulate him and use his house in ways society
deplores. He has been a victim, too, in different ways.

It's a shame Bruzzese's house was taken so easily. It strikes me a
justice system that proclaims fairness and humanity as principle
foundations should not have allowed him to so easily acquiesce.

At the least, the Crown's application for forfeiture should have been
opposed and strenuously argued. Efforts should have been made to
distinguish Bruzzese from all the other dope growers who lost their
properties.

He is easily distinguishable from them. He is a crack addict who owned
a home thanks to the good faith (although perhaps ill-conceived)
generosity of his dying father, who no doubt wanted to do something
good for his son.

We have adversarial justice and, at times, the courts must require
parties to be adverse, to ensure important issues like this - ones
with such significant ability to alter lives - are properly weighed.

Justice Blair could have asked for more than he had before ordering
the home be seized. He could have delayed it pending a careful look at
the issues.

Bruzzese lost so much Thursday and society gained so little. It was a
disturbing, saddening display that left me feeling a little grim.

The penalty Bruzzese has paid is grossly disproportionate to that
which so many other low-level, drug-addicted crack-shack street
dealers have been handed.

He needs to be held accountable for his actions, for certain. I'm not
suggesting he is blameless. And without question the people around him
are entitled to live free of the crime and fear crack houses bring.

But taking so much from someone in pathetic circumstances like
Bruzzese can't be the answer. There has to be more meaningful ways,
whether the man who lost it all thinks he agrees or not.