-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cops May Have Had Right To Shoot ('The Houston Chronicle'
Says Six Members Of The Houston Gang Task Force Who Broke Into
An Innocent Man's Apartment And Killed Him Sunday Night May Face
No More Than Temporary Suspension With Pay 'Because The Law
Does Not Allow Anyone To Resist An Arrest, Even An Illegal One')
From: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org (MAPNews)
To: "MN" (mapnews@mapinc.org)
Subject: MN: US: TX: Cops May Have Had Right To Shoot
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 1998 02:44:18 -0500
Sender: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Reply-To: owner-mapnews@mapinc.org
Organization: Media Awareness Project http://www.mapinc.org/lists/
Newshawk: Tammera Halphen (webdcyner@sprynet.com)
Pubdate: Fri. July 17, 1998
Source: Houston Chronicle (TX)
Contact: viewpoints@chron.com
Website: http://www.chron.com/
Author: Rad Sallee and Jo Ann Zuniga
COPS MAY HAVE HAD RIGHT TO SHOOT
DA speaks about deadly home raid
Harris County District Attorney John B. Holmes Jr. said Thursday that the
six Houston police officers involved in a Sunday raid in which a man was
killed could have been within their rights to shoot him -- even if they had
no right to be in his home.
"I don't know of any authority at this point that gave them the right to be
in that residence," Holmes said. "But that doesn't make the shooting a
crime."
The six suspended officers, assigned to the gang task force at the Southwest
patrol division, reportedly fired about 30 shots after breaking into Pedro
Oregon Navarro's apartment at 6711 Atwell at 1:30 a.m. Sunday in southwest
Houston.
Relatives of Oregon, 23, who died from multiple bullet wounds, have retained
attorney Paul Nugent to investigate his death.
Nugent said family members told him that even after Oregon was shot, the
officers tried to bully them into saying he had been dealing drugs. He said
they had denied it.
Police acknowledged that no drugs were found in the apartment.
"Pedro was a father, soccer player and landscape worker," Nugent said. "What
we have here is a good kid from a good family."
Holmes said that because the law does not allow anyone to resist an arrest,
even an illegal one, officers had a right to use deadly force against Oregon
if he threatened them. A pistol was found at the scene, but police have not
yet said if it had been fired.
"They do not have to sit still for a citizen pointing a firearm at them,
even if they entered unlawfully," Holmes said.
"They were -- every one of them -- in uniform," he said. "There should not
be any reasonable idea in your mind that you are being the victim of a kick
burglary."
Investigators removed pieces of carpet to be tested to determine whether
bullets had struck the floor where Oregon's body lay.
"If they continued to fire when there was no need, it would be murder,"
Holmes said.
Holmes said Texas law at one time had recognized a person's right to resist
an unlawful arrest. But since the mid-1970s, the law had required that
everyone submit to arrest, even in their homes.
The only exception, Holmes said, is the right to defend yourself against
unreasonable force, such as being beaten.
Holmes said his investigation is continuing, along with those of the Police
Department's homicide and internal affairs divisions.
Holmes said the pistol had been traced to its initial purchaser, whom he
would not identify, except to say it was not Oregon.
"Further investigation has to be done," Holmes said. He said there is no
reason to think it was placed at the scene by police to justify the
shooting.
While the incident is being investigated, six of the nine officers present
at the incident have been suspended with pay: Lamont E. Tillery, 30, David
R. Barrera, 28, Pete A. Herrada, 28, David Perkins, 30, James R. Willis, 28,
and Sgt. Darrell H. Strouse, 34.
A bullet fired by another officer hit Tillery in the shoulder, but his
safety vest prevented serious injury.
The officers, who had no search or arrest warrant, have told investigators
they raided the place after a confidential informant told them he had
witnessed a drug transaction there.
A source told the Chronicle that the tipster was not registered with HPD, as
is required of all police informants. Holmes said the tipster had just been
arrested and was trying to "make a deal" with officers.
Holmes said that violates the policy of his office, and any such deal would
not be honored by prosecutors and would not stand up in court.
Even if a reliable informant had seen drugs sold in the house, Holmes said,
officers would have to get a warrant from a judge before breaking in.
Although there are some circumstances that justify warrantless entry -- hot
pursuit, for instance -- Holmes said he knows of none that applies in this
case.
"There are damn few exceptions to searching someone's private residence," he
said.
"If the informant got in and was wired (with a recording device) and the
officers heard someone say `I'm gonna blow you away,' then they could go
in," Holmes said.
Oregon's mother, Claudia Navarro, and his sister, Susana, identified his
body Thursday at the Harris County Medical Examiner's office. It will be on
view at Claire Brothers Funeral Home and buried after a Sunday service at
St. Matthews Episcopal Church.
"It's been a disaster," Claudia Navarro said at the southwest apartment
where the raid took place. Oregon's blood stained the gray blanket in his
bedroom.
Nugent, sweeping his hand across the small living room, said, "Does this
look like the apartment of a drug dealer?"
Nugent said the family contacted his firm -- Foreman, DeGeurin, Gerger &
Nugent -- "because they were being besieged by police."
He added, "They thought they were being treated unfairly and were being
bullied," he said.
He conceded that Oregon may have had the weapon, for self-protection.
"But there is nothing wrong in having a gun in your home. There is a legal
process in America even for police officers. You don't just barge in and
start shooting people," Nugent said.
Six bullet holes are readily visible in Oregon's bedroom wall. The bullets
apparently entered the next-door apartment's bedroom, which happened to be
vacant.
"He had been working all week in Austin on a landscaping job and had just
come in on Friday. He was planning to attend a soccer game on Sunday,"
Nugent said after speaking to Oregon's co-workers at Ryan Landscaping.
Also in the apartment at the time of the raid, were Oregon's brother,
Rogelio, and a brother-in-law, Nugent said.
Mexican Consul General Manuel Perez Cardenas said he has discussed the
shooting with Police Chief C.O. Bradford because the family is from Mexico.
Perez said he is satisfied that the investigation will be thorough.
Perez said his government probably will send a "diplomatic note" to U.S.
officials in Washington, D.C., noting the Mexican government's interest in
the case.
"In this type of incident, there are two sides," Cardenas said: "The human,
or family, side, and the legal -- not political -- legal, side."
Assistant U.S. Attorney Gerald Doyle, a prosecutor in the Civil Rights
section, said the Department of Justice is not investigating the matter.
"Our normal practice is to monitor the state investigation civil rights, if
the state is proceeding -- and they are," said Doyle. "Based upon the
results of their investigation we will either proceed on our own, or rely on
what the state does."
Chronicle reporter S.K. Bardwell contributed to this story.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Week Online With DRCNet, Issue Number 50 (The Drug Reform
Coordination Network's Original News Summary For Activists, Including New
Details About General Barry McCaffrey's Innocence Abroad And Those Inflated
Interpol Statistics He Cited But Never Apologized For)
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 1998 15:37:36 -0400
To: drc-natl@drcnet.org
From: DRCNet (drcnet@drcnet.org)
Subject: The Week Online with DRCNet, Issue No. 50
Sender: owner-drc-natl@drcnet.org
THE WEEK ONLINE WITH DRCNet, ISSUE No. 50 -- JULY 17, 1998
-------- PLEASE COPY AND DISTRIBUTE --------
(To sign off this list, mailto: listproc@drcnet.org with the
line "signoff drc-natl" in the body of the message, or
mailto:lists@drcnet.org for assistance. To subscribe to
this list, visit http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html.)
(This issue can be also be read on our web site at
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Week Online Hits 50th Issue, DRCNet on the Move
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#our50th
2. Drug Crazy Update
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#drugcrazy
3. Drug Czar Gets Facts Wrong Again... Infuriates Dutch on
Eve of Visit
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#footinmouth
4. Wire Report of the Week
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#wire
5. Prohibition Poll on Time Online
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#poll
6. Taliban Ban Television
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#taliban
7. Legislative Update
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#legislation
8. EDITORIAL: The General Invades (and Insults and
Infuriates) The Netherlands
http://www.drcnet.org/wol/50.html#editorial
***
1. Week Online Hits 50th Issue, DRCNet on the Move
This week marks the fiftieth issue of The Week Online. It
has been an interesting and exciting first year, learning as
we've gone along even as the drug policy reform movement has
grown significantly. The publication itself has certainly
grown up during the past year and we are determined to
continue on that course, bringing you original news, special
features, and hard-hitting editorials from a reform
perspective. We are also planning to offer more and varied
options to those of you who would like to participate more
actively; stay tuned for forthcoming announcements.
Two weeks ago, we announced that thanks to generous reader
participation in our last membership appeal, we were
approaching the 1,000 paying member mark, just as we had
passed the 6,000 e-mail subscriber mark. Thanks to those of
you who responded, DRCNet paying membership is now in the
four digits!
This issue of The Week Online details how over the last
several days, our drug czar, retired General Barry
McCaffrey, and his public relations staff, have shown little
shame in their willingness to dramatically misrepresent the
drug policy record in The Netherlands and to hurl uncalled-
for invective at drug policy reform advocates in the United
States. Moreover, this issue shows how the press is
developing a healthy skepticism and is no longer letting the
General's misinformation go unchallenged.
It also shows, however, that even when backed into a corner,
the drug war powers that be do not intend to make a graceful
exit. They will fight tooth and nail to preserve a destruc-
tive policy based on ignorance. And they will fight even on
the cruelest fronts, blocking compassionate access of
medical marijuana to patients and criminalizing the life-
savers who provide sterile syringes to addicts to reduce the
spread of epidemic diseases. They will fight poorly, as in
the past week, or they will fight skillfully; and they will
use our tax dollars to demonize this reform movement every
step of the way.
Yet in the end, enough Americans care about truth and reason
to hear us out. And in an open debate, we emerge over time
as the victors, because facts, morality and reason are on
our side. The last six weeks have seen an enormous opening
of that debate, after several hundred individuals of
unimpeachable credentials and reputation joined to condemn
the global drug war as "causing more harm than drug abuse
itself" (http://www.lindesmith.org/news/background.html).
General McCaffrey tried to label these leading lights a
"fringe group," but he failed to convince.
For victory to be achieved in the war over the war on drugs,
however, large networks of participating, contributing
citizens must be built. Grassroots political organization
as well as potent public education campaigns are needed to
shift the levers of public policy in our direction. You, as
part of DRCNet, are present at a unique juncture in history,
where the power of the information superhighway allows
movements to organize more rapidly than ever before.
The DRCNet 6,000 needs to turn into tens of thousands and
then into hundreds of thousands. Will you walk with us on
these first early steps toward a better world? Please
pledge your support to DRCNet today, by using our
encryption-secured member registration form at
http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html. If you are already a
supporting member, please consider renewing your support to
help us take the effort to a higher level.
BUMPER STICKERS AVAILABLE
Thanks to the support and efforts of two of our members, we
now have stopthedrugwar.org bumper stickers! View one at
http://www.drcnet.org/bumpersticker.gif. We will
automatically send one or more bumper stickers free of
charge to all new or renewing members. Let us know if you
need more than one; please only ask for more if you will
really be displaying all of them. If you are nervous about
placing a controversial sticker from this emotional topic on
your vehicle, there are plenty of other places to put them -
- a notebook, a dorm-room door, a bulletin board, you name
it. Again, use our encryption-secured online registration
form at http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html to join and get
your sticker! We will also send stickers to anyone who is
already a paying member, if you contact us and request one.
And if you are financially unable to join, but would like to
display a stopthedrugwar.org sticker to help us recruit new
members, send us a note and let us know where you plan to
place your sticker. Please address all bumper sticker-
related correspondence to bumpersticker@drcnet.org), and be
sure to include your full name and current mailing address.
EYEGIVE UPDATE
Since our appeal a few weeks ago, participation in the
eyegive fundraiser has increased dramatically, from 193 to
277 participants, and DRCNet earnings have risen
accordingly. As mentioned before, we received the first
checks from eyegive, last month, totaling more than $775,
and the next ones promise to be much bigger than that. If
you haven't signed up yet, you can automatically select
DRCNet as your recipient non-profit by visiting
http://www.eyegive.com/html/ssi.cfm?CID=1060.
Even here at DRCNet HQ, we know how hard it can be to
remember day after day to visit the eyegive page and point
and click to raise money. The easiest way to keep up is to
set the eyegive home page, http://www.eyegive.com, as the
default start-up page in your web browser -- use edit-
preferences in Netscape or view-Internet options in Internet
Explorer.
For those of you who didn't read the bulletin, here is a
brief recap: Eyegive is a web site through which people can
earn money for their favorite non-profit organization, just
by clicking on a page of ads that appears when you visit the
site. Clicking up to five times per day earns DRCNet
valuable funds, if you have selected us as your recipient
non-profit.
Your wrist and finger clicks can add up to earn DRCNet
thousands of dollars -- money that can pay for part-time
help, advertise for new members, any number of things.
Please check it out, and those of you who have taken part
already, keep up the good work!
A NOTE OF THANKS
We'd like to take a moment to publicly thank Nick Merrill
and the Manhattan-based Calyx Internet Access Corporation
for services they've provided us for more than three years,
much of the time for free, and at all times motivated by
their desire to help the cause. Calyx's help came at an
important time, and was invaluable in bringing the online
reform effort up to a new level. Calyx still hosts web
sites and mailing lists for a number of drug policy reform
groups, as well as DRCNet's own drug library search engine.
Some of the services that Calyx provides include: Dedicated
Lines, Web Site Hosting, Server Colocation, Internet/
Intranet, LAN/WAN Consulting, Security Consulting &
Firewalls, Web Design, Special Hosting Rates for 501(c) Non-
Profits, and Secure Shell Accounts.
You can find Calyx online at http://www.calyx.net, or
reach Nick Merrill at nick@calyx.net.
***
2. Drug Crazy Update
There are a litany of reasons to support drug policy reform
-- prohibition has devastating consequences in several areas
-- crime & violence, spread of infectious diseases,
political destabilization in source countries, police
corruption, undertreatment of pain, overdoses and
poisonings, popularization of dangerous forms of drugs,
ready access of drugs to kids. Mike Gray's book Drug Crazy,
published by Random House just a month ago, makes clear to
the reader that not only is prohibition a bad idea, but the
issue is not a close call in any sense of the word. The war
on drugs is profoundly untenable, and Gray, a member of
DRCNet's advisory board, has demonstrated that using all his
dramatic skill -- Gray authored the script for the hit
movie, The China Syndrome, and worked on Star Trek: The Next
Generation, among many other credits.
For the past couple of months, we have asked our readers to
call or visit their local bookstores and ask about Drug
Crazy. We have since heard reports of stores ordering more
copies and displaying them more prominently. We have also
heard reports of stores not reordering copies quickly enough
to meet the possible demand. Please take a few minutes to
call or visit your local bookstores and ask if they have a
copies of Drug Crazy. If they offer to order it for you,
tell them you would prefer to buy the book from a store that
has the book in stock.
Your efforts will continue to pay off in bringing this
important book to the public's attention. It will also help
DRCNet, as we are prominently featured on pages 203-204,
introducing an appendix of Internet drug policy resources.
We have already had some sign-ups from people who heard
about us from the book. Visit http://www.drugcrazy.com to
read the first chapter, and learn all about it!
***
3. Drug Czar Gets Facts Wrong Again... Infuriates Dutch on
Eve of Visit
U.S. Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey was supposed to be going to
Europe this week to observe the ways in which other
countries are dealing with their drug problems, but
statements leading up to and during the first leg of his
trip revealed that the retired General left with pre-
determined conclusions and ignorance of some basic, non-
expert level facts.
McCaffrey's misstatements, and the conclusions he drew from
them, elicited sharp and angry responses from the Dutch just
days before McCaffrey was scheduled to arrive in The
Netherlands. The strange and very un-diplomatic string of
incidents cast our nation's top drug warrior as well as his
Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) in a less-
than-favorable light. This was compounded by several odd
statements made by ONDCP spokespersons, at least one of
which was later retracted, in an apparent attempt to cover
the ex-general's flank. As you read the following
chronology, ask yourselves, if you were leading the fight to
preserve prohibition, is this what you would do?
JULY 9: On CNN's "Talkback Live," McCaffrey engages in a
brief debate over the Dutch policy with "Drug Crazy" author
Mike Gray. McCaffrey says, ominously, it turns out, "We
ought to agree to disagree on the facts." Shortly
afterward, he calls the Dutch experience "an unmitigated
disaster." Gray warns that a diplomatic protest could come
from the Dutch embassy, which has been alerted that
McCaffrey and his office are misrepresenting the facts about
Dutch policy and results. McCaffrey changes the subject,
saying the Dutch have received protests from the French and
Germans over the results of their drug policy. Gray
counters that the French have a higher addiction rate than
the Dutch, and that the U.S. has a higher addiction rate
than the Dutch. Here, again, McCaffrey says: "I probably
would again dispute you on the facts."
JULY 10: McCaffrey tells the Associated Press he's not
interested in visiting Dutch "coffeeshops," the hallmark of
the nation's tolerant policy toward marijuana and hashish.
"Coffeeshops would be a bad photo op," he explains. And,
"I'm not sure there's much to be learned by watching someone
smoking pot."
JULY 11: From Washington, the Dutch ambassador to the U.S.,
Joris M. Vos, writes to McCaffrey, that he is "confounded
and dismayed" by the czar's depiction of the Dutch policy.
"I must say that I find the timing of your remarks, just six
days before your planned visit to the Netherlands with a
view to gaining firsthand knowledge about Dutch drug policy
and its results, rather astonishing." A McCaffrey deputy
spokesman, Rob Housman, tells the AP in Washington he hopes
the incident will not affect McCaffrey's European trip.
JULY 13: In Stockholm, where he is beginning his European
trip, McCaffrey comes out swinging. He says, "The murder
rate in Holland is double that in the United States. The
per capita crime rates are much higher than the United
States." He provides statistics to the media. In 1995,
McCaffrey says, the U.S. had 8.22 murders per 100,000
people, while the Netherlands had 17.58 per 100,000 (2.13
times the U.S. rate). Also, at the Stockholm press
conference, McCaffrey's staff hands out copies of the
complaint letter to McCaffrey from ambassador Joris Vos. It
will later turn out that the Dutch Embassy in Washington is
none too pleased with McCaffrey's release of the letter
saying that the communique was meant to be "private and
confidential."
JULY 14: A Dutch agency, the Central Bureau of Statistics,
publishes crime data contradicting McCaffrey's claims. The
1995 murder rate, rather than being double that of the U.S.,
is instead 1.8 per 100,000 in the Netherlands, making the
U.S. rate 4.6 times higher than in The Netherlands. There
were 273 murders total in 1995, fewer than most U.S. cities.
However, for the year 1995, the Dutch ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE
rate was 17.6 -- likely the number McCaffrey had cited. (We
initially thought McCaffrey had simply misplaced a decimal
point. Note that while most Americans could not tell you
the homicide rate here or anywhere else, most readers of
newspapers, not just drug and crime policy experts, are well
aware that the rate is much higher here than anywhere in
western Europe.)
DRCNet, after researching the Dutch homicide rate, contacted
the Dutch Embassy to confirm the statistics and to get their
reaction to McCaffrey's claims. The embassy confirms the
rate of 1.8 per 100,000 and expresses its concern over what
is now becoming an international incident.
DRCNet then contacts ONDCP seeking either a retraction or
reiteration of McCaffrey's claim. Spokesperson David
DuRoche tells The Week Online that while he hasn't spoken to
McCaffrey on the matter, "The general stands by what he
said."
DRCNet issues the following press release to over 100 media
outlets:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, JULY 14, 1998
CONTACT: David Borden or Adam J. Smith, (202) 293-8340
American Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey, on the
first leg of his 8-day fact-finding mission
to Europe, has once again proven that he
knows not of what he speaks. But this time,
McCaffrey's blatantly erroneous statement
of "fact" might well touch off an inter-
national furor.
Speaking to the press in Stockholm, Sweden,
McCaffrey trashed Dutch drug policy, saying,
"The murder rate in Holland is double that
in the United States." McCaffrey cited the
statistics as 8.22 per 100,000 in the U.S.
and 17.58 per 100,000 in The Netherlands.
"That's drugs," he concluded, adding that
he was anxious to visit The Netherlands to
find out "Why is it that they're happy about
what they're doing?"
Unfortunately, the General had his zeroes
misplaced. The Dutch murder rate is
actually 1.758 per 100,000, less than one
fourth that of the U.S. Astonishingly,
this morning, David DeRoche, a spokesman for
McCaffrey, told the Drug Reform Coordination
Network, an Internet-based information
center of the drug policy reform movement,
that "The General stands by what he said."
David Borden, DRCNet's Executive Director,
said, "There is a very disturbing trend of
blatant misinformation coming from Barry
McCaffrey, which seems to indicate that he
is woefully uninformed about key parts of
the very policy he is paid to represent and
enforce. It is astonishing that McCaffrey
is so ignorant of global drug policy that
he would parrot such a wildly erroneous
statistic. Anyone who knows anything at all
about global drug policy and its impact
would have spotted in an instant that this
was blatantly untrue."
In August and again in December, 1996,
McCaffrey was quoted in the media claiming
there is 'not one shred of evidence' that
marijuana has medicinal value, when in fact
there are literally dozens showing that it
does -- ONDCP's chief counsel, Pat Seitz,
later claimed on CNN that he had never made
such comments. In April, McCaffrey made
numerous statements claiming that studies of
Canadian syringe exchanges refuted the value
of syringe exchange, only to be rebuffed by
Dr. Julie Bruneau and Dr. Martin T.
Schechter, the authors of the studies them-
selves, who, in an op-ed in the New York
Times, (4/9/98) stated that McCaffrey had
"misinterpreted" their findings, which
called for more, not less needle exchange.
Further, on several occasions this spring,
including once during a speech at the
University of Louisville, McCaffrey has ridi-
culed "noted agronomists such as Woody
Harrelson" who advocate for the legalization
of industrial hemp, despite the fact that
over 100 Kentucky farmers are currently
suing the federal government for the right
to do so. "It is silly" he said of the
issue, calling it a "thinly disguised attempt
... to legalize pot." But earlier this
month, a University of Kentucky study indi-
cated that if hemp were legalized for indus-
trial use, it would immediately become the
second most valuable legal crop in the state,
behind only tobacco. In an interview with
NBC Dateline, aired Feb 21, 1997, McCaffrey
put forward an Illinois study he claimed sup-
ported the D.A.R.E. program, only to later
dismiss the very same study as "twaddle" when
confronted with its actual findings -- that
D.A.R.E. doesn't work for most children and
may be counterproductive.
DRCNet Associate Director Adam J. Smith said,
"This latest misstatement concerning the
Dutch murder rate, in which McCaffrey was off
by a factor of ten, is especially troubling in
view of the fact that he obviously feels well-
versed enough on the Dutch situation to
publicly ridicule their brave pragmatism in
the face of global Prohibitionist pressures.
These types of misstatements show clearly that
the government's blind embrace of a failed
Prohibitionist Drug War is ideologically, and
not factually driven. The U.S. murder rate is
more than four times that of The Netherlands.
That's Prohibition."
- END -
Later, Dutch officials tell the Reuters news agency, "The
figure (McCaffrey is using) is not right. He is adding in
attempted murders." Foreign Affairs Ministry spokeswoman
Birgitta Tazelaar adds, "(McCaffrey's) statements show...
that he is not coming totally unbiased. We hope he is
coming here to learn from the Dutch drug policy, and one can
only learn if open-minded... We hope his opinions will...
come more into line with the facts."
JULY 15: In a Washington Times story, McCaffrey spokesman
James McDonough, responding to a Dutch official who pointed
out that the drug czar had used the wrong number, attempted
homicide instead of homicide, when comparing crime stats
between the U.S. and Netherlands, says, "Let's say she's
right. What you are left with is that they are a much more
violent society and more inept [at murder], and that's not
much to brag about."
DRCNet searches for U.S. statistics on "attempted homicide."
Apparently, this is not a category that is kept by the FBI
or any other federal agency. What is kept by the FBI is
"aggravated assault". The FBI definition for this offense
reads as follows: "Aggravated assault is an unlawful attack
by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting
severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault is
usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means
likely to produce death or great bodily harm."
The two definitions are not absolutely identical, but in
practice cover basically the same set of offenses. Hence we
compare them here. In 1995, the rate of "attempted murder"
in The Netherlands was 17.58 per 100,000 while for the same
year, according to the FBI, the U.S. rate for "aggravated
assault" was 418.3 per 100,000, more than 20 times higher
than in The Netherlands.
DRCNet again contacts ONDCP, whereupon Mr. DuRoche tells The
Week Online that "those figures for the Dutch murder rate
come directly from Interpol. I cannot speculate on why the
Dutch Government would report one set of numbers to Interpol
and another to their public." Pressed as to whether it
would not have been proper, given the Dutch government's
vehement protest over the veracity of the numbers, to check
into the matter further, especially since McCaffrey publicly
proclaimed that Dutch drug policy was responsible for this
shocking rate of homicide, DuRoche said that the matter was
between Interpol and the Dutch. Asked whether, if it turned
out that the number was erroneous, and it was shown that the
U.S. murder rate was in fact 4.6 times higher than that in
The Netherlands, his office would retract their contention
that Dutch society was "much more violent" than the U.S.,
DuRoche told The week Online, "well, it's really not
relevant to compare the two societies. The Dutch have
universal health care, near 100% literacy, an homogeneous
population and effective gun control." Told that it was
McCaffrey, and not the reform movement that had made the
comparison, DuRoche responded, "Isn't Mike Gray on your
advisory board? This was all in response to Mike Gray's
comments on CNN. We didn't bring this up."
But regardless of whether or not McCaffrey spread false
information about Dutch drug policy of his own volition or
in response to a statement (made days earlier) by an
American on CNN, it is not the first time that U.S.
officials had so blatantly misstated facts about The
Netherlands that the Dutch were moved to respond
diplomatically. In 1995, a booklet on "legalization" put
out by the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) merited the
following official response, translated by Mario Lap of the
International Foundation for Human Rights:
Monday 9 Jan 1995, The Hague
Her Majesty's Minister of Foreign Affairs of
The Netherlands drs. Hans van Mierlo has
officially announced the following answer in
writing to parliamentary questions by the MP
Thom De Graaf of the (his own) liberal party.
The Minister will point out to the American
Authorities that Dutch Drug policy is falsely
represented in a manual of the American Drug
Battle Agency, DEA.
The manual mentions that the police in The
Netherlands is instructed not to take action
against street trade in what ever kind of
drugs. That is not true.
In many municipalities in The Netherlands
the policing and prosecution of street
traders of drugs has a high priority and
special cell space is reserved for that
purpose.
Furthermore, according to the DEA a research
of the entire Rotterdam population of fifteen
years and older shows that 3.3 % of this
population uses cocaine.
In the research referred to by the DEA, 3.3%
of the Rotterdam population from fifteen to
nineteen years of age mentioned that they had
used cocaine (lifetime prevalence).
It is totally irresponsible to state that all
of these people are cocaine users and
ridiculous to relate the figures to the total
Rotterdam population.
Further data in the manual are not all wrong
but stripped of their context and therefore
easily misinterpreted.
The mistakes made will be discussed with the
American Authorities by The Minister of
Foreign Affairs.
- END -
DRCNet contacted the Dutch Embassy, at which time Mr. Morris
indicated that, according to several Dutch newspapers,
published nearly ten hours earlier, Interpol had
acknowledged that they had used the wrong figures in the
category of homicide, and that the numbers were therefore
"misleading". Interpol has reportedly stated that that the
error would be corrected in its next publication.
Morris further stated that "We really don't want to poison
the waters any further on the eve of Mr. McCaffrey's arrival
in The Netherlands. Obviously there is a difference of
opinion over drug policy, and over the success of the Dutch
system. The Dutch government is justifiably proud of the
progress we have made under our system, and, while we
certainly don't put ourselves in the position of advising
other nations what to do domestically, we are comfortable
that the strategies that we have adopted, evolving as they
are, are in the best interests of Dutch society."
Later the same day (7/15) the Associated Press ran a story
on the brewing controversy in which Robert Housman, a
McCaffrey spokesperson was quoted, saying that the Dutch
government was being "pulled into an internal political
debate" in the United States by those who support
decriminalizing drugs. "These legalizers put American
children at risk," the statement said. "The Dutch
government should be renouncing them, not siding with
them... Every nation is free to set their own policies
domestically. However, other nations must respect the
sovereignty of others and be keenly aware of the impacts of
their policies on the global community."
Three hours later, according to the Associated Press, ONDCP
called the news services to retract the statement, saying
that the statement "no longer stands" because it didn't
reflect McCaffrey's views. No further information was
given.
Later in the day, McCaffrey traveled to Switzerland, where a
successful three-year pilot program in opiate maintenance
has just been completed amidst glowing reports of its
success, and much discussion of its emulation across Europe
and even in Canada. Leading up to the meetings, McCaffrey
had made statements which indicated his opposition to such
programs, including his belief that maintenance is "like
giving alcohol to the alcoholic" and "our own worry would be
that in the longer term it will contribute to an inexorable
growth in the rate of heroin use and become a dysfunctional
aspect of drug prevention in society at large." When the
two sides emerged from their meetings, a Dutch reporter
asked McCaffrey about the ongoing controversy. McCaffrey
responded that "It's probably less helpful to continue a
debate through the press over the nature of Dutch drug
policy than to have a face to face, open evaluation of it."
A wire report from that press conference said that "[A]
Swiss health official said... McCaffrey had backed down from
some of his comments about addiction in Switzerland after
his meetings. Thomas Zeltner, head of the Swiss federal
health bureau, said he told McCaffrey that the maintenance
program was limited to below 10 percent of all chronic
heroin users and that Swiss officials had produced data to
show that the U.S. adviser's conclusions about Swiss
addiction rates were wrong."
McCaffrey arrived in The Netherlands early in the morning
(7/16) US eastern time. The following is a report from
Harry Bego in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, Director of
Legalize! (http://www.legalize.org) and a co-coordinator of
the Global Coalition for Alternatives to the Drug War:
7/15, The Netherlands: The Dutch media are
really jumping on McCaffrey. There are
critical articles in all papers, all news
programs on radio and TV follow the visit
closely; there's a critical editorial
comment even in the right-wing 'Telegraaf'.
Yesterday July 15th, 6:15pm, on TV2, the
news show 2 Vandaag ('2 Today') summarized
reactions in the Netherlands to McCaffrey's
statements so far.
At the end, there was an interview with
McCaffrey. It was by telephone, recorded
just before 6:00pm, it looked slightly
edited; McCaffrey was still in Switzerland.
The interviewer was on screen, against a
background of images from McCaffrey's
European trip, people smoking joints, etc.
Here's a transcript. Apparently Dutch
feelings are, unfortunately, 'bruised' in
the context of an internal US debate; he
seems to imply we shouldn't worry about
that too much.
2 VANDAAG: Hello Mr. McCaffrey, welcome in
our program. Your comments on Dutch drugs
policy were greeted here with indignation
and condemnation. Are you still looking
forward to come to the Netherlands?
MCCAFFREY: Of course. I have enormous
interest and respect in the viewpoints of
the Dutch policy makers. I think there's
a very important responsibility to carry
on a dialog across the Atlantic.
2 VANDAAG: But what is your reaction to
that storm of indignation?
MCCAFFREY: Well, I've seen no storm, so I
have no reaction, I think I have great
confidence that there's something to be
learned from not only reading about the
Dutch experience but also listening to
anecdotal insight on what their experien-
ces have been. I think friends should
candidly discuss their viewpoints and how
that can come (?) learning.
2 VANDAAG: Well, talking about candidly,
you have called Dutch drug policy an
unmitigated disaster. Is that still your
opinion?
MCCAFFREY: Well I think that there is an
enormous amount of press attention, perhaps
others, to what has been a very stiff
internal debate in the United States,
driven on one side by those of us in both
public and private life who have construc-
ted this bold and aggressive ten year drug
prevention and treatment strategy, and on
the other side of the issue are many who we
believe are promoting the legalization of
drugs, and what... Unfortunately, the
Netherlands is frequently used as an icon,
by one side of the argument. So in the
process of putting that into better context
it is possible to bruise Dutch feelings,
which is unfortunate.
2 VANDAAG: But is it, yes or no, an
unmitigated disaster?
MCCAFFREY: My own viewpoint has been that
our decision should be based on objective
criteria, and not on ideology or culture
or politics.
2 VANDAAG: But the Dutch government says
you've got your statistics wrong.
MCCAFFREY: The data that many people are
now looking at is Interpol data, but that
should be a discussion between Dutch autho-
rities and the Interpol data, with me not
acting as an intervening variable.
2 VANDAAG: OK sir, thank you very much for
your comments.
Reformers over here have been busy writing
articles and giving interviews; I had
almost half a page yesterday in the
Volkskrant (2nd largest paper after the
Telegraaf) titled 'General McCaffrey has
already lost his war', illustrated by a
depressing picture of a chain gang in an
Alabama prison; gist: U.S. drug policy is
the real disaster.
Today McCaffrey isn't giving interviews
during the day, but there will be a press
conference tonight. I have sent out a
press statement containing the New York
Times citation of his allegations about a
'slick misinformation campaign', pointing
to his own obvious efforts now to mislead
the U.S. audience.
Harry Bego
- END -
Finally, in a statement that could potentially draw umbrage
from U.S. police, McCaffrey told Reuters in The Netherlands:
"I came with a bias that Dutch police were good... I
cautioned my Dutch partners that police of this high caliber
can allow policy to work adequately even when it may not be
good policy." (Editor's Note: This can mean either that
American prohibition is working 'adequately' or that our
police are simply too 'low caliber' to make work a clearly
superior policy. Which one is it?)
***
4. Wire Report of the Week
A Reuters article this week reported that "the Virginia
Crime Commission has set up a federal and state task force
to look into the possible link between drug trafficking and
organized crime." (Possible link? Do they really need a
task force to answer such a question?)
***
5. Prohibition Poll on Time Online
Time Magazine has been conducting an online poll on
prohibition since July 9, and it is still linked in and
accepting votes. Last we checked, 59.16% of respondents had
voted for legalization of all "recreational" drugs for
adults, another 29.95% had voted for legalization of
marijuana, and only 10.87% had voted to maintain prohibition
of all currently illicit drugs. These online polls aren't
scientific, of course -- they draw those people who are most
motivated for them -- but the same is true of elections.
Visit http://cgi.pathfinder.com/time/daily/poll/drug.html to
cast your vote, check the latest tally, and read related
commentary.
***
6. Taliban Ban Television
Last December we reported that the head of the United
Nations Drug Control Program, Pino Arlacchi, a former
prosecutor, proposed providing major funding for opium
eradication to the Taliban, a brutal, extremist group that
controls of much of Afghanistan. The proposal has drawn
widespread criticism from human rights groups, who see it as
helping to establish the Taliban's control of the country
once and for all. Among the Taliban's policies are a ban on
education and health care for women. Women who don't cover
their bodies from head to toe are often dragged into the
street and beaten. Arlacchi's proposal has received the
support of the Clinton administration.
Coverage of the controversy is not likely to make it into
Afghanistan itself, however, at least not foreign coverage.
Time reported on July 9 that the Taliban have now outlawed
possession of television sets. Good allies in the drug war!
***
7. Legislative Update
The following articles are reprinted from the Drug Policy
Foundation's Network News, a monthly publication for DPF's
advocacy network. To sign up to receive Network News,
contact DPF at (202) 537-5005 e-mail dpf@dpf.org or visit
DPF's web site at http://www.dpf.org.
MONEY LAUNDERING BILL EXPANDS CIVIL ASSET FORFEITURE
H.R. 3745, the "Money Laundering Act of 1998," was unveiled
by Rep. Bill McCollum (R-FL) as one of the bills to expand
the war on drugs; its main focus is broadening the
government's forfeiture powers. H.R. 3745 raises
constitutional concerns including possible Fourth Amendment,
due process and privacy rights violations. Additionally,
H.R. 3745 intrudes on the role of the federal courts by
significantly changing the rules of evidence and civil
procedure, and conflicts with current efforts to curb U.S.
Treasury and Justice Department forfeiture excesses. Some
of the most troubling aspects of H.R. 3745 are the civil
(non-criminal) asset forfeiture provisions. H.R. 3745
would:
* allow the federal government to go on "fishing
expeditions" by subpoenaing bank records before filing a
complaint or starting a forfeiture procedure;
* make it nearly impossible for a person to assert an
"innocent owner" defense;
* expand wiretapping authority for suspected violations of
IRS form-filing requirements;
* unduly expand the number of new acts that can be
predicates for triggering the money laundering statute,
allowing federal agencies to seize entire businesses and
bank account for any and all manner of alleged regulatory
and state law violations; and
* expand the Department of Justice mandate by making DOJ
into a de-facto world police force -- enforcing alleged
violations of foreign nations' laws, even when foreign
governments don't want to prosecute.
DPF supports meaningful asset forfeiture reform that
uniformly limits the scope of the government's forfeiture
powers by eliminating some of the most egregious civil
forfeiture practices. DPF supports Rep. Henry Hyde's (R-IL)
Manager's Amendment to H.R. 1965, the Civil Asset Forfeiture
Reform Act, and has written Rep. Hyde urging him to oppose
H.R. 3745 and to move H.R. 1965 to a vote during this
sessions of Congress.
REP.RANGEL SEEKS ELIMINATION OF SENTENCING DISPARITY
The criminal justice approach to dealing with the problems
presented by drug use has created unacceptable social and
legal side effects. Due to discriminatory enforcement
practices and unjust mandatory minimum sentencing laws, a
disproportionate number of young African-Americans are in
prison for low-level drug offenses. While it only take five
grams of crack cocaine to trigger a five-year mandatory
minimum, it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to receive the
same sentence.
Rep. Charles Ranger (D-NY) has introduced H.R. 2031, the
"Crack-Cocaine Equitable Sentencing Act of 1997," to
eliminate the sentencing disparity between crack cocaine and
powder cocaine offenses. One of DPF's short-term priorities
is to raise public awareness of the injustices of mandatory
sentencing and its failure to have an impact on crime.
DPF's first priority in this area is the elimination of the
disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder
cocaine.
Rep. Rangel has requested that supporters of this
legislation write to their members of Congress to express
their support and request that their representative become a
co-sponsor of this bill.
(You can call your Representative (or find out who your rep
is) via the U.S. Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224- 3121.
You can write to your rep at: U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC 20515. Further information on asset
forfeiture is available from Forfeiture Endangers American
Rights, http://www.fear.org. Further information on
mandatory minimums is available from Families Against
Mandatory Minimums, http://www.famm.org.)
***
8. EDITORIAL: The General Invades (and Insults and
Infuriates) The Netherlands
On January 11, Barry McCaffrey, retired four-star general
and current director of the Office of National Drug Control
Policy (the Drug Czar), embarked on a scheduled eight-day
visit to Europe to see how drug policy was being handled
back on the Continent. The tour included scheduled stops in
"zero-tolerance" Sweden, harm-reductionist Switzerland, and
the pragmatic Netherlands. In the midst of an invigorated
domestic debate over the Drug War in the U.S., pulling such
a trip off smoothly was certainly going to be tricky. But
while diplomacy was clearly called for, McCaffrey, the old
soldier, had his guns blazing even before he boarded the
plane. Predictably, he shot himself in both feet.
The fiasco started days before his departure, when McCaffrey
told a CNN audience that Dutch drug policy is "an
unmitigated disaster." Needless to say, this did not go
over too well with his soon-to-be hosts in The Netherlands.
In response, the Dutch Embassy in Washington sent McCaffrey
a private letter calling his remarks, and their timing,
"curious" and "astonishing". McCaffrey's statement made one
thing clear, however: he was not going to Europe to learn
anything. Instead, it was obvious that he felt he already
knew all that he needed to know about drug policy, and about
the Dutch experience. Over the next several days he
proceeded to show everyone, except perhaps himself, how
wrong he was.
On the first day of his trip, during his stop in Sweden to
praise their policies (which include police pulling kids out
of nightspots on mere suspicion and forcibly drug-testing
them), McCaffrey handed reporters a "fact booklet."
Contained in that booklet, and reiterated by the man
himself, was the claim that the "Dutch murder rate is double
that of the U.S." In defense of the since-beleaguered Czar,
the numbers themselves (17.58 homicides per 100,000 Dutch
citizens, and 8.22 per 100,000 U.S. citizens) came from the
international agency Interpol. But even casual observers of
drug and crime policies knew immediately that something was
way, way off. "That's drugs" McCaffrey crowed triumphantly,
and questioned "why in the world they (the Dutch) think this
is a success."
In fact, Interpol did have its numbers wrong. As they
admitted later, they had included attempted murder with
murder. The real murder rate in the Netherlands is 1.8 per
hundred thousand, less than one-fourth the U.S. rate and
among the lowest in the European Union. The Dutch
government quickly challenged the claim, and McCaffrey and
his office were called upon to retract the statement. But,
warriors to the core, ONDCP would concede nothing. "Let's
say (that's) right," retorted an ONDCP spokesperson when
confronted with the numerical mix-up. "What you are left
with is that they are a much more violent society and more
inept [at murder], and that's not much to brag about." As
curious as that statement is on its face, it is even more
erroneous. According to the FBI, the corresponding U.S.
rate (for aggravated assault -- the U.S. doesn't keep a
statistic for attempted murder) is over 20 times higher than
in The Netherlands, at over 400 per hundred thousand.
Still later, another ONDCP spokesperson released a statement
chiding The Netherlands for being pulled into a domestic
policy argument in the U.S. The statement said that The
Netherlands should "repudiate" the U.S. "legalizers" and
further warned that nations ought to be aware of the impact
of their policies and actions on the global community. That
statement was retracted just hours later. One can only
assume that even McCaffrey and the drug warriors could not
attempt to pawn off such hypocrisy with a straight face.
America, after all, exports its drug policy by twisting arms
to insure that other nations, particularly source and trans-
shipment countries, surrender enormous amounts of their own
sovereignty in service to the U.S. war.
But if there is a level of self-awareness among the drug
war's leadership, it is minimal at best. And the events of
this past week illustrate well the crux of the problem.
Barry McCaffrey has spent his entire career as an officer in
the United States Army. During the latter part of that
career he was among the highest-ranking individuals in the
armed forces. He is not used to being questioned, much less
being called upon to admit he was wrong. And so, on one
issue after another, be it the state of medical research on
medical marijuana, the efficacy of needle exchange, the
economic viability of industrial hemp, or the murder rate in
The Netherlands, Barry McCaffrey, even when proven wrong
publicly and emphatically, simply cannot admit defeat.
And this is the problem with our entire drug policy, really.
Prohibition, for eighty years ineffectual and counter-
productive, does not, cannot work. But no one, not the ex-
general, not the bureaucrats whose careers depend upon it,
not our representatives who play to the fears of the
electorate and not our President who famously didn't inhale,
no one will admit that the emperor has no clothes.
It is disturbing, to say the least, that a public servant
such as McCaffrey, the man we are paying to lead us out of
the morass of youth drug abuse and drug-related violence, is
so consistently and spectacularly wrong on the facts. Even
more disturbing is that he is so self-certain that he feels
comfortable making determinations before he has even seen
the evidence. But most disturbing of all perhaps, is that
he refuses to admit error in the face of insurmountable
evidence. Because that indicates that he will never learn.
Adam J. Smith
Associate Director
***
DRCNet needs your support! Donations can be sent to 2000 P
St., NW, Suite 615, Washington, DC 20036, or made by credit
card at http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html on the web.
Contributions to DRCNet are not tax-deductible.
***
DRCNet
***
JOIN/MAKE A DONATION http://www.drcnet.org/drcreg.html
DRUG POLICY LIBRARY http://www.druglibrary.org/
REFORMER'S CALENDAR http://www.drcnet.org/calendar.html
SUBSCRIBE TO THIS LIST http://www.drcnet.org/signup.html
DRCNet HOME PAGE http://www.drcnet.org/
STOP THE DRUG WAR SITE http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/
-------------------------------------------------------------------
[End]
to 1998 Daily News index for July 16-22