Source: Columbia Daily Tribune (MO)
Copyright: 1998 Columbia Daily Tribune
Contact:  http://www.trib.net/forms/formletter.htm
FAX: (573) 815-1701
Mail: P.O. Box 798, Columbia, MO 65205
Website: http://www.showmenews.com/ 
Pubdate: Tues, 29 Dec 1998
Columnist: Forrest Rose, Tribune columnist e-mail:  Please read on. This is, in my opinion, a gem! - Richard Lake, Sr.
Ed., MAP

NEW POLICE DRUG POLICY PUTS PUNISHMENT FIRST 

Real progress in the field of human endeavor is exasperatingly balky. It
inches forward haltingly, in tiny increments, punctuated by periodic heaves
and backslides. But inch forward it does. 

This belief forms the bedrock of my unshatterable faith in humankind.
That’s right: It can’t be shattered. That’s not to say, however, that it
doesn’t absorb a few magnificent dents every now and then. In fact, it took
a heck of a ding last week when I read about the new "philosophy" of the
Columbia Police Department. Under new chief Norman Botsford, we appear to
be moving backward. 

Ever since the Columbia City Council authorized it in 1985, many arrests in
the city for possessing small amounts of pot were charged in Municipal
Court. Police would write the smoker a summons, and the defendant would
appear in court, plead out and pay the fine. 

Botsford encourages police to handcuff every joint sucker and haul him off
to county jail, then to pursue the case in state court, which means the
defendant is likely to need the services of both a bondsman and an
attorney. Ultimately, I believe, the defendant usually pleads out and pays
the fine -- about the same amount he’d pay in Municipal Court. 

I said "encourages" and I meant it. Botsford has said there is "no written
policy," but officers have "freedom" to choose the harsher process. 

Look at the numbers. In 1997, Columbia police sent 168 pot-possession cases
to state court and 113 to Municipal Court. As of Christmas Day, the 1998
figures were 313 in the state courts versus five in the city court. That
reflects a drastic change in policy no matter how artfully you wriggle and
weasel. 

Why would Columbia police officers choose to make a fuss about some doper
copping a toke in the parking lot? Why would they bother to subject her to
the booking process at the overcrowded Boone County Jail? Why would they
want to shovel a greater burden onto the court dockets and county
attorneys’ caseloads? 

"We’re going to keep doing what we’re doing until we hear different from
the chief," declared police Capt. Marvin McCrary. 

"People will not walk out anymore with a ticket," he told a Tribune
reporter. "We’ve wanted them to know they’d been arrested. We’ve wanted to
let them know they’ve been bothered." 

McCrary displays a startling candor. There is no mistaking the meaning of
his words: He seems to believe it is the place of the police to mete out
punishment. Before a trial, before an arraignment, before the lawyers and
the judges and the AY-CEE-EL-YEW start sticking their noses in, these
potheads -- most of whom are scum anyway-- are going to know fear. They are
going to show respect. 

For many police officers, the presumption of innocence exists only as an
obstacle to be overcome or, in this instance, pre-empted. What it might
entail to "know you’ve been arrested" is a matter for speculation. I
imagine it depends. At its best, it must be highly unpleasant, and I
wouldn’t be surprised if some fairly furious scuffles have grown out of
these petty pot busts. 

Botsford pledged upon his arrival -- and presumably in the job interviews
- -- to bring "community policing" to Columbia. I have always wondered a bit
uneasily what that meant, and maybe this is it: let people "know they’ve
been bothered." 

Come on, chief. One of your first creations in Columbia was a six-person
unit dedicated specifically to drug interdiction. You want to project a
tough stand on drugs, like they do in Florida, where you came from.
Columbians can get behind that, to a point. 

But maybe they think a $175 fine is enough for smoking a joint. Perhaps
they don’t think the police should go out of their way to hassle 99 percent
of the smokers. Sixty percent was probably plenty, OK? That proportion
should be sufficient to cover the real thugs and plug-uglies, the habitual
bad guys and makers of trouble. This ain’t Florida. 

So far, four members of the Columbia City Council, including the mayor,
have expressed reservations about what Botsford calls "a different
philosophy." That’s four out of seven. This is a Midwestern college town.
We don’t much care for fanaticism, even in condemning such serious matters
as possession of a few grams of pot. 

Be reasonable. Be professional. Reconsider. Sometimes to move forward, you
have to step back.

- ---
Checked-by: Richard Lake