A BAD LAW PRODUCES UNJUST RESULTS

To the Editor of THE EAGLE:- If the Concerned Citizens of Great Barrington
really represent higher principles of appropriate justice for all
defendants in the future, rather than just a getting a few friends off
after the fact, keep up the momentum. Get the Legislature to amend a bad
law, and perhaps find an alternate candidate for district attorney. The
school zone drug law is awful, harsh and inflexible with only a tenuous
connection to its stated purpose. It gives widely disparate results to
rather similar behavior.

For example, simple "possession" doesn't carry the school zone penalty. But
possession "with intent to distribute" does. I saw two young women go to
trial on this, charged under the school zone law after being caught
together with $50 of marijuana. One girl testified that she'd bought the
stuff strictly for her own use. Convicted of possession, she got probation.
The other girl said she'd bought her share of the stuff for herself -- and
to share with her roommate. Boom! Intent to distribute to the roommate. Two
years. But the practical reality is that until a harsh law snags the scions
of "good families," nobody much cares. Sympathetic poster children are
needed. If social standing is not an issue, who do people keep bringing up
the reputations of the defendants' parents? I know who some of the parents
are, and they are indeed wonderful folks. But if the community standing of
the parent determines whether the children should be jailed, then it is
about social class. So some folks are mad at me for shining light on that
secret reality -- but the fact is, I agree with them on the basic issue of
a bad law.

And about guns -- many of the people doing the Pittsfield shootings are
young folks involved in drug-related disputes. Selling drugs isn't about
peace, love and understanding.

VINCENT LEE

Lee