TULIA CASE PROMPTS BILLS AIMED AT UNDERCOVER AGENTS' EVIDENCE

AUSTIN - With dozens of drug convictions under review in the controversial
Tulia sting, lawmakers are considering bills that would require undercover
officers to gather more evidence in order to prosecute drug cases.

Civil rights groups are pushing the bills in light of a judge's
recommendation that the convictions of 38 mostly black defendants from the
Panhandle farm town should be dismissed because they were based on
questionable testimony from a single undercover agent accused of racial
prejudice.

Under bills before both the House and Senate, investigators would need to
produce some kind of corroborating evidence to support an undercover
officer's testimony in order to gain a conviction. In short, they need
something to prove the undercover agent isn't making the whole thing up.
Civil rights groups such as the Americans Civil Liberties Union and the
League of United Latin American Citizens support the bills. Some law
enforcement groups, however, say it places a new, sometimes dangerous,
burden on police.

"The Tulia incident has certainly brought a lot of attention to the issue
but we would point out it was the failure of more than just the agent but a
failure of the entire criminal justice system," said Brazos County Sheriff
Chris Kirk, a spokesman for the Sheriff's Association of Texas.

Civil rights groups have protested the 1999 Tulia bust, which brought
international attention and questions about the way the state's drug task
forces conduct investigations.

Many of the cases were based solely on the testimony of officer Tom
Coleman, who said he spent 18 months working undercover to make drug cases
against a large portion of the town's black population.

Coleman, who is no longer in law enforcement, worked alone and used no
audio or video surveillance, often writing notes about alleged drug buys on
his legs. Little or no corroborating evidence was introduced.