Drug WarRant

Americans for Forfeiture Reform reports: OIG releases and audit of DEA adoptive seizure process and equitable sharing requests

• Of instances involving federal adoption of assets seized, 65% of reported samples required DEA headquarter approval to adopt the seizure because the instance lacked all of the following criteria:
  1. the seizure was based on a federal or state judicial seizure warrant;
  2. an arrest was made for a felony violation of the Controlled Substances Act or an equivalent state felony charge that would be a felony if pursued under federal law; and/or
  3. drugs or other contraband associated with a federal felony drug offense were also confiscated at the time of seizure.
• The OIG report notes “for the period of October 1, 2000, through September 30, 2011, the DEA and other federal agencies processed over 150,644 seized assets valued at about $9.2 billion of which $5.5 billion (60 percent) originated from seizures processed by the DEA and $3.7 billion (40 percent) originated from seizures processed by other federal agencies.” [Another $522 million in DEA seizured assets was noted but omitted from analysis for a lack of equitable sharing requests.]

That’s right. In 65% of DEA asset seizure cases, there was no warrant, there was no felony arrest, and there were no drugs seized. Just stuff the DEA wanted to take.

Latin American Leaders: UN should promote debate on alternatives to fighting drug trafficking

Calderon, Santos, and Molina all hit on this theme, without explicitly mentioning legalization (“market alternatives” was used again), but making it clear that the current policy wasn’t acceptable.

If you’re interested in watching Calderon’s fairly strong speech, see it here (skip to around the 32 minute mark. [Thanks, Sanho]

We have a ton of problems here in the United States with out-of-control prosecutors who seem to be completely unaccountable (and immune to lawsuits when they abuse their position).

We’re not the only ones with that problem. Check out this story from Russia.

Zelenina heads a laboratory at the Penza Agricultural Institute, some 600 kilometres southeast of Moscow, one of the best-equipped chemical-analysis labs in Russia. She is a specialist in the biology of hemp and poppy, and is a sought-after expert in legal cases involving narcotics produced from these plants.

In September 2011, the defence attorneys of Sergey Shilov, a Russian businessman under investigation by the Russian Federal Drug Control Service (FDCS), asked her to provide an expert opinion on the amount of opiates that could possibly be extracted from 42 metric tonnes of food poppy seeds that Shilov had imported from Spain in 2010. . .

. . .On the basis of gas-chromatography and mass-spectrometry measurements of samples analysed in her lab, Zelenina calculated the overall morphine and codeine content in the poppy-seed consignment in question to be 0.00069% and 0.00049%, respectively. In such low concentrations, opiates can only be identified or extracted in well-equipped analytical chemistry labs, she wrote.

“This opinion apparently failed to satisfy the prosecutors,” says Irina Levontina, a linguist at the Russian Language Institute in Moscow, who is frequently heard as an expert in libel and drug lawsuits. “It has become quite common for Russian prosecutors to accuse independent experts if they don’t like their opinions. It can be downright dangerous for experts to appear in court.”

Talk about a chilling effect on both science and criminal defense.

She’s been released pending trial, but faces serious charges. More here

Just as a reminder, Russia has an extremely backward zero-tolerance drug policy that outlaws heroin replacement programs and needle exchange — a policy that has resulted in a 10-fold increase in HIV cases in the past decade.

Oh, and the head of the UNODC is Russian representative Yuri Fedotov.

Seems promising…

Dear Hillary,

I am writing to apply for the post of drug war publicist for your Mexico Drug War. I have over ten years of experience publicizing various aspects of the drug war and believe that I could step in immediately and help reinvigorate your drug war visibility.

I’m thrilled to see you’re looking to move in this direction. Clearly, past efforts by the State Department to publicize the drug war have been less than fully effective, as drug war awareness barely reaches the level of political discussion. It certainly hasn’t helped that the ONDCP director has undermined these efforts by bizarrely claiming that the war doesn’t even exist!

I have some great ideas and feel like I’m ready to start on the ground running. I figure one of the first things we can do is more widely distribute some of the most gruesome images of Mexican victims, in media throughout the United States. Then, in the Mexican press, we distribute images of U.S. soldiers (or DEA agents) shooting at Mexican nationals on Mexican soil. This should give us a good start.

I have many more excellent ideas like this and would love to bring them to the State Department’s War on Drugs. I am confident that I can increase the public’s awareness of this war in no time.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Sincerely,

Pete Guither
Experienced Drug War Publicist

Seven Sensational Drug Documentaries

Romney Fat Cat’s Reefer Madness – Maia Szalavitz shines a light on the Semblers.

Seattle Times Editorial: Approve Initiative 502 – It’s time to legalize, regulate, and tax marijuana.

Tweets.

Kevin Sabet: In the South Bronx, 76 of cigarette packs collected avoided the combined NYC and State tax. Legalization doesn’t work. http://t.co/rxH0LP7M

Pete Guither: @KevinSabet EVEN in the poor S. Bronx, portion of packs collected tax and rest were less-violent gray, not black market. Legalization works.

Why legalizing marijuana is a bad idea – the Baker Institute Blog continues its legalization series with a very weak argument by Joan Neuhaus Schaan.

A war that should end A Mennonite calls for Christians to support ending the war on drugs.

A rather curious article by Baker Institute fellow Gary Hale, former chief of intelligence in the Houston Field Division of the DEA: Legalization of marijuana: When, not if

He calls himself a pragmatist who is neither for nor against legalization, but considers it inevitable and argues that we should plan for it, by considering a myriad of legal issues.

It’s interesting speculation, but seems to me, at points, to be a bit of putting the cart before the horse.

Sure, all these things could come up, but not right away, and we don’t even know how legalization is going to occur. There could be (and should be) opportunities for different states to try different regulatory approaches — that’ll cause some chaos, sure, but it’ll help us discover the ones that work the best.

Couple of other points I found telling:

More questions: Will governments be faced with having to pay “reparations” to the families of police officers and federal agents who died while working to destroy marijuana plantations in the United States and abroad? […] What do we say to these men who answered the call of the U.S. government to suppress the supply-side of the marijuana?

Not surprising, but telling, that it didn’t even occur to him to include “reparations” to the civilians who died in the war on marijuana.

I also find it a bit odd that he focuses so much on marijuana as hallucinogen, when in reality its classifcation as such is more a technicality than an actual factor.

…

Other articles in the series, which continues this week, include:

Marijuana: A case for legalization by William Martin

The greatest harms associated with cannabis are not the effects of the drug but of our drug policies…

In a contest with alcohol and tobacco, marijuana wins by Silvia Longmire

There are too many additional arguments on both sides of the issue to list them all here, and it would behoove the reader to do additional research if intent on forming a solid opinion one way or another. But based on the potential (or lack thereof) of harm to the human body, for people to become dependent, and for people to become violent against each other, marijuana wins in a competition against already-legal alcohol and tobacco.

…

It’s worth pointing out that, as usual, this series asks the wrong question, as I’ve made clear in the past: Legalization Isn’t the Question

I’m in Tulsa, Oklahoma until Sunday, attending the Experiential Classroom througn OU. I’ve got homework and everything, so I’ll probably be swamped.

Ten Huge Issues Being Ignored in the Presidential Campaign.

ThinkProgress has this piece out and it’s nice to see that we’re not the only ones noticing. Number one on the list is Mass Incarceration and the Drug War.

One of the principal causes of the rise of mass incarceration is the War on Drugs, which has failed abysmally at limiting the use of dangerous drugs but succeeded wildly at aiding and abetting racial inequality in the United States and the murderous drug trade abroad. The Justice Department recently doubled down on these policies by initiating a massive crackdown on medical marijuana in states that have legalized the drug’s medicinal use.

LEAP video: Cop opens up about losing her brother to the war on drugs.

Great catch (Thanks to Evert and Transform).

The Swedish Government (one of the most rabidly pro-prohibition) makes a cogent case against prohibition…

‘In the opinion of the Swedish Government the prohibition against selling snus cannot be regarded as compatible with the principles of free movement of goods, since the prohibition is discriminatory and is not in proportion to the level of public health sought. The same level of health protection can be achieved by means of less intrusive measures.’

Denver Post editorial writer takes on the dirty tactics of the opposition to Amendment 64

Let’s have a real pot debate

I’m not here today to formally pick a side in the fight over marijuana legalization in Colorado, but I will suggest that one side is playing dirty.

The argument that legalization is about keeping kids safe doesn’t pass the smell test. And keeping information from voters smacks of timidity, incompetence, or both.

We should have a real pot debate.

Ring the bells. The long effort has finally paid off!

Colombia’s president says last big drug lord has been captured

BOGOTA, Colombia –  President Juan Manuel Santos announced Tuesday evening that a man he described as Colombia’s last big-time drug lord had been captured in neighboring Venezuela. It was the third arrest of a purported Colombian drug boss in the last year.

Santos said alleged drug boss Daniel “Loco” Barrera was arrested in the Venezuelan city of San Cristobal after months of multinational cooperation that included help from the United States and other nations.

“The last of the great capos has fallen,” Santos said in a brief statement to journalists. He didn’t answer questions.

Nice coverage by Phillip Smith over at StoptheDrugWar.org: Bolivia, Venezuela Reject US Drug Criticism

“I hereby designate Bolivia, Burma, and Venezuela as countries that have failed demonstrably during the previous 12 months to make substantial efforts to adhere to their obligations under international counternarcotics agreements,” President Obama said in the determination. […]

Venezuela “rejects in the most decided manner the accusations of the government of the United States,” the communique said, adding that the presidential determination is “plagued with false statements, political preconceptions and veiled threats,” which only repeat its “permanent line of aggression against independent sovereign governments.”

Venezuela also counterpunched, accusing the US of allowing “a fluid transit” of drugs across its borders” and “the laundering of capital from drug trafficking through the financial system.”

“The government of the United States has become principally responsible for this plague that is the scourge of the entire world,” it said.

The foreign ministry added that Venezuela’s anti-drug efforts improved after it kicked out the DEA in 2005 […]

Bolivian President Evo Morales, for his part, said the US, home of the world’s largest drug consumer market, had no grounds on which to criticize other countries about its war on drugs.

“The United States has no morality, authority or ethics that would allow it to speak about the war on drugs.” […]

“I’m convinced that the drug trade is no less than the United States’ best business,” Morales added, noting that since the first international drug control treaties were signed in 1961, drug trafficked has blossomed, not declined. He said he has suggested to South American leaders that they form a commission to report on how well Washington is doing in its war on drugs.

Morales also took the occasion to lambaste the US for opposing Bolivia’s request before the United Nations to modify that 1961 treaty to acknowledge that chewing coca leaf is “an ancestral cultural practice” in the Andes.

Gone are the days when countries feared being sent to the Drug War Principal’s office.

Mike Riggs over at Hit and Run brings us the winner of the day: Wilmington, Massachusetts Police Chief Michael Begonis.

“Illicit drug use is a form of domestic terrorism to some extent,” said Wilmington Police Chief Michael Begonis. “It is preying on folks who are more susceptible and who need a better life. And it’s something that we need to deal with head on.”

Riggs then gives a photo essay to ask just who are the real domestic terrorists – drug users or SWAT? And notes:

For me, the guys with the machine guns and the legal authority to kill me in my own home inspire far more terror than illicit drugs or the people who use them.

Check it out.