Ett svenskt cannabisforum Forums Coffeeshopen Nyheter swecan.org omnämnt idag på Expressens kultursida Reply To: swecan.org omnämnt idag på Expressens kultursida

  • sphincter

    Member
    2003-07-17 at 07:52

    Jag har last boken och rekommenderar den. Det framgar faktiskt inte i boken att Schlosser ar nagon narkotikaliberal, utan han tar upp fall om dubbelmoral och liknande.

    Nedanstaende ar ett exempel som tas upp i boken. Notera att citatet nedan inte ar fran boken utan fran natet, men det handlar om en person som stas omnamnd i Schlossers bok.

    Quote:
    For years the Justice Department has been lobbying Congress
    for expansion of its forfeiture powers, for broader definitions of
    property subject to forfeiture, and for procedures which give the
    government greater and greater advantages over claimants. Their
    lobbying has produced the current statutes, which put the burden of
    proof on the claimant, make claimants pay in advance the
    government’s costs of forfeiture proceedings, and in all other
    ways imaginable put a heavy thumb on the scales of justice in favor
    of the government and to the detriment of the claimant.

    The feds have used their powers to the fullest, declaring
    “ZERO TOLERANCE” to be their policy. Zero Tolerance means no
    sympathy for innocent owners of ships — such as the Monkey
    Business (of Gary Hart fame) or Woods Hole Oceanographic
    Institute’s floating lab that surveyed the ruins of the Titanic —
    when a crew member is found by raiding customs agents to be in
    possession of personal use quantities of drugs.

    Zero tolerance also means parents, grandparents, spouses,
    friends, business partners, finance companies, landlords and all
    manner of unsuspecting people get caught up in forfeiture
    proceedings because of something someone else did which is beyond
    their control.

    Although the statutes are supposed to protect innocent third
    parties — according to the hype the Justice department is feeding
    us — in reality innocent people are losing property as often as
    criminals.

    These overbroad powers give law enforcement the unlimited
    discretion to destroy the financial lives of innocent citizens, to
    take away from them their status achieved over a lifetime of hard
    work and “upward mobility.”

    These overbroad powers are often used to discriminate between
    the powerful and the powerless. As a prime example of this,
    consider the case of Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie Ohta of
    Hartford, Connecticut — the Iron Matron of forfeiture. As head of
    her office’s asset forfeiture unit she was ruthless and extremely
    successful, with her unit netting more than $26 million since 1986.
    According to the Hartford Courant, “Ohta’s aggressive pursuit of
    these asset forfeiture cases has won her national recognition in
    the ranks of federal prosecutors, and she frequently lectures them
    on how to apply the law.” (3-22-92).

    As head of her unit, Ohta mercilessly pursued Zero Tolerance,
    making innocent parents and grandparents pay for the wrongdoings of
    their offspring. The Hartford Courant reported that on several
    occasions Ms. Ohta argued that “people should know what goes on in
    their own homes.” (3-22-92).

    Presumably Ohta knew what was going on in her own home when
    her son Miki began using and selling drugs.

    The Hartford Courant reported that the first incident happened
    in 1989 when Miki allegedly sold marijuana to an undercover
    informant from his parents’ home. Miki had another scrape with the
    law in December 1991, when he was arrested for allegedly selling 50
    “hits” of LSD from his parents’ car on September 3, 1991, and for
    possession of marijuana when stopped by police, again in his
    parents’ car, on September 29, 1991. In the September 29 incident,
    his companion was allegedly in possession of two “hits” of LSD.

    Was Mrs. Ohta’s property forfeited? No.

    As a result of relentless pursuit of this issue by the
    Hartford Courant, and an article by the Connecticut Law Tribune,
    the ironies of this situation did not escape public notice. The
    U.S. Attorney’s Office transferred Leslie Ohta to another unit, at
    least temporarily.

    In the end, however, the U.S. Attorney’s Office decided that
    forfeiture of Ohta’s property would be “inappropriate”.

    Most of the forfeiture defense attorneys interviewed by the
    Hartford Courant agreed that Ohta’s assets should not be forfeited
    — not because she was a well-connected flag-waving forfeiture-
    winning Assistant U.S. Attorney, but because, in principle, neither
    she nor any of the innocent people she so hypocritically forfeited
    property from should be punished for the actions of their children,
    grandchildren or acquaintances.

    I agree except for the double standard. If the people
    prosecuting these forfeiture laws are held to the same standard as
    the people they have prosecuted, either Leslie Ohta’s house and car
    should be forfeited or the government should be forced to give back
    the property it took from other innocent parents, grandparents and
    third parties. This should include all the innocent victims in the
    country since the main Justice Department gave the blessing to
    excuse Ohta for her son’s crimes.

    We want to follow up on this and make sure justice is done.
    Please write us if you have any information about Ohta cases or
    other Zero Tolerance victims. Send us your opinion (or share it
    through the computer bulletin board) on whether Mrs. Ohta’s
    treatment should also be the standard for forfeiture victims not
    employed by the Justice Department. If you want to share your
    thoughts with the Connecticut U.S. Attorney’s Office, write U.S.
    Attorney Albert Dabrowski, Esq., 450 Main Street, Room 328,
    Hartford, CT 06103, or you can write Leslie Ohta herself at 2273
    Hebron Ave., Glastonbury, CT.