Pubdate: Wed, 13 Jul 2005
Source: Berkshire Eagle, The (Pittsfield, MA)
Copyright: 2005 New England Newspapers, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.berkshireeagle.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/897
Author: Carl  Stewart
Note: The writer is a former federal prosecutor, having served in the 
administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford and  Carter
Bookmark: 
http://www.mapinc.org/find?217 
(Drug-Free Zones)
Bookmark: 
http://www.mapinc.org/find?199 
(Mandatory Minimum Sentencing)
Bookmark: 
http://www.mapinc.org/find?225 
(Students - United States)
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n1091/a12.html
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n882/a04.html
Related: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v05/n779/a04.html

PUNISHMENT MUST FIT THE CRIME

To the Editor of THE EAGLE --

As the first trial of the "Great Barrington 18" approaches, it seems 
all-the-more important to reflect on the ramifications of the 
decision by the district attorney to prosecute all of those arrested 
under the "school-zone" enhanced sentencing provision, regardless of 
the severity of the alleged criminal conduct and the absence or 
presence of prior criminal history. Mr. Capeless is widely considered 
to be an intelligent and dedicated public servant, but in this case, 
at least, he seems to have forgotten the traditional  dual 
responsibilities of a prosecutor. Whereas, under long-established 
Anglo-American principles of criminal jurisprudence, defense 
attorneys have as their sole function the dedicated, one might say, 
single-minded, representation of their clients, the state, 
represented by the district attorney, has two roles: he must not only 
represent the interests of the citizens he serves, but he is also 
charged with the responsibility to see that justice is done. Both 
are  equally important, for it is the quality of justice that is 
dispensed that in  large measure defines us as a civilized society.

In Saudi Arabia, the penalty  for someone stealing a loaf of bread, 
even if that is what is necessary to feed  a starving family, is the 
lopping off of the offending arm. Surely, Mr. Capeless would agree 
that in some instances, the just result at the end of a prosecution 
is not necessarily the conviction of the defendant, if  the result is 
a penalty that is much harsher than what justice demands.

If Mr.  Capeless finds himself, for whatever reason, unwilling or 
unable to do what the  district attorneys in virtually all of the 
other counties of this commonwealth  have done, that is, to decline 
to prosecute under the Draconian provisions of  the "school-zone" 
law, then it is incumbent upon the jurors who will decide  these 
cases to determine if the punishment fits the crime. Can anyone 
reasonably argue that two years confinement to prison is an 
appropriate penalty for the transfer of a single marijuana cigarette 
by an unthinking, immature teenager to an undercover law enforcement officer?

Who  gains by this result?

There are surely other remedies, indeed harsh ones -- for example, 
long hours of community service which could benefit other young 
people at risk -- that would not have such a ruinous effect on the 
lives of our young people who are just embarking on what will 
hopefully be a long and upward journey of discovery and self-realization.

CARL STEWART

Alford

Note: The writer is a former federal prosecutor, having served in the 
administrations of Presidents Nixon, Ford and  Carter.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth