Pubdate: Sun, 13 Nov 2005
Source: Herald, The (WA)
Copyright: 2005 The Daily Herald Co.
Contact:  http://www.heraldnet.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/190
Author: Attorney General Rob Mckenna

DON'T SUSPEND RIGHTS IN FIGHT AGAINST METH

No one can argue against the need for the state's fight, led by 
Attorney General Rob McKenna, against methamphetamine.

However, some suggestions to further the fight, offered by McKenna's 
task force "Operation: Allied Against Meth," are troubling.

The most problematic portion of the report is the call to allow law 
enforcement greater use of wiretaps, bugs and secretly taped 
conversations. The practice is known as "one-party consent," wherein 
investigators can listen with wiretaps or tape conversations without 
the targeted person knowing.

As Doug Klunder, director of the Privacy Project for the ACLU of 
Washington pointed out, police already have that power - the 
difference being two very powerful words: "probable cause." Since 
1989, if police have probable cause of criminal activity, they've 
been able to use wiretaps or tape conversations. The meth panel is 
recommending that the phrase "probable cause" be removed so police 
can more easily catch those in the meth trade.

"Law enforcement strongly believes one-party consent will greatly aid 
in investigating drug crimes," McKenna was quoted as saying. Well, of 
course law enforcement thinks that. It is easier to bug suspects' 
homes and wait to hear if crime happens. Throwing out a few other 
pesky protections would make it easier still. It's just that we would 
no longer recognize what country we are living in.

If probable cause is not necessary to spy on citizens, what exactly 
is the criteria? Suspicion? Gut instinct? Prior record? Why stop at 
meth? Shouldn't we throw out the probable-cause clause for all 
crimes, so police can catch all kinds of criminals?

The panel recommends the state should increase assistance for 
addicts, which is an excellent suggestion. However, the task force 
also suggests reducing the use of time off for good behavior for 
those sentenced under the Drug Offender Sentencing Alternative. It 
would require that drug enhancement convictions be served 
consecutively. The goals of helping addicts with their addictions and 
at the same time keeping them in prison for as long as possible seem 
at odds. And since our corrections system is already stretched, 
longer sentences will mean higher costs.

Most of the task force's suggestions are good, common-sense steps to 
slay the meth beast. But we can't let a crime and health problem 
cause us to lose sight of our rights, or we will face a bigger 
scourge than meth.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Beth Wehrman