Pubdate: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 Source: Boston Herald (MA) Copyright: 2012 The Boston Herald, Inc Contact: http://news.bostonherald.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/53 Note: Prints only very short LTEs. Author: Christopher Ott Note: Christopher Ott is communications director for the ACLU of Massachusetts. Page: 31 LAB WOES CALL FOR BREAK FROM DRUG WAR SCRIPT It's going to take fresh thinking to address the scandal at the state drug lab without making Massachusetts budget woes even worse. Unfortunately, however, most of what we're seeing so far is the exact opposite: a business-as-usual approach, with an enormous (and growing) price tag. As soon as the state drug lab scandal broke, it became clear that the cost of reexamining thousands of cases would be huge. Early estimates caused sticker shock with numbers like $30 million or $50 million, to pay for courts, prosecutors, and public defenders to re-try thousands of cases based on tainted evidence. More recently, the Committee for Public Counsel Services has estimated that handling the scandal could cost as much as $332 million. Gov. Deval Patrick has questioned that figure, but would anyone really be surprised if costs keep creeping higher? There is never a good time for a fiasco like this, but now is particularly challenging for Massachusetts. Recent reports suggest state revenues are running $256 million behind budget. Make no mistake: This means that plans to dole out millions more to deal with the drug lab scandal are on a collision course with hard financial realities. We need a better solution, instead of simply doing things over the same way. Instead of retrying every case, the ACLU and Families Against Mandatory Minimums advocate that three types of cases simply be dismissed. First, dismiss tainted cases involving nonviolent drug offenses. The decades-long drug war has failed to reduce rates of drug addiction, and it is past time to reconsider the fundamental drug war assumption that so many cases involving illegal drugs should be prosecuted aggressively. The drug lab scandal provides an opportunity to recognize that cases involving nonviolent drug offenses should never have been a high priority in the first place - so it makes even less sense to litigate them again. Second, cases involving police officers or prosecutors who communicated directly with Annie Dookhan, the chemist at the center of the scandal, should also be dismissed. Police and prosecutors should have been walled off from the science of testing drug samples. Evidence mishandling means it could be impossible to establish the truth in these cases, and ensuring the integrity of the criminal justice system requires throwing them out. Third, we should dismiss compromised cases involving defendants who have already served at least half their sentences. Those who have served time, lost jobs, or lost custody of children based on tainted evidence should not have to wait any longer for justice - in prison, at public expense - while prosecutors try to sort this out. The drug lab scandal presents an unprecedented challenge for Massachusetts. For justice to be done and to avoid spending tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars at a time when the state budget is getting tighter, we should break with assumptions from the failed war on drugs and a one-size-fits-all solution. - --- MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom