Every year, the US Justice Department's Bureau of Justice Statistics releases its annual reports on Prison Inmates at Midyea

In June, foes of Mendocino County, California's relaxed marijuana cultivation ordinance, managed to narrowly r

Former Republican Congressman and current Libertarian Party Candidate for president Bob Barr Monday issued a statement criticizing the widely

Kenneth Rau, the Bismarck, North Dakota, man who suffers the dubious distinction of being the first pe

Libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr is the first presidential hopeful to speak out regarding the brutal drug raid in Berwyn Heights, MD that resulted in the death of the mayor's two dogs:

The former Republican Congressman from Georgia released a statement on his presidential campaign website about the July 29 Prince George's police and sheriff's raid on the home of Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo.
…

The raid, he wrote, "illustrates how the drug war threatens the liberties of all Americans."

He said he believed that law enforcement has become more arrogant and less accountable, usually with very little public attention, and promises that as president, he will improve the situation.

"As president I will ensure that federal law enforcement agencies set a good example for the rest of the country," he said. "In a Barr administration, government officials will never forget that it is a free people they are protecting." [Washington Post]

I'm still getting used to hearing words like these from former drug warrior Bob Barr, but I'll take it. Barr, despite his unfortunate history, is now speaking out against abusive drug war policing with a vigor unmatched, or even attempted, by the major party candidates.

Unfortunately, we can be reasonably sure we won’t hear a word about this from Obama or McCain. Sure, it is an ugly national controversy with a fairly obvious right and wrong side. And yes, a careful statement promising to defend the rights of innocent, everyday people against government abuse would be politically safe, in and of itself. After all, there's nothing anti-police about standing up for professionalism in law-enforcement.

But implicit in all this is the central question of how far we as a society are willing to push the limits of peace and freedom in the name of a war on drugs that has already exhausted many of us to the point of unrestrained bitterness. It's a conversation that can't be avoided once Cheye Calvo's name is spoken and one which the major party candidates remain hesitant to explore. Their silence becomes increasingly hard to explain as it becomes steadily more apparent each day that the drug war blood bath sometimes doesn't discriminate as well as it's supposed to.

(This blog post was published by StoptheDrugWar.org's lobbying arm, the Drug Reform Coordination Network, which also shares the cost of maintaining this web site. DRCNet Foundation takes no positions on candidates for public office, in compliance with section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and does not pay for reporting that could be interpreted or misinterpreted as doing so.)

In the wake of the acquittal of the Lima, Ohio, SWAT team member who killed Tarika Wilson -- and with DC-area local Mayor Cheye Calvo pressing the issue of SWAT raids following the killing of his two dogs -- it bears reminding what the root cause was of both these horrible events and of many others -- a stupid, reckless, cowboy mentality, in which law enforcers who are supposed to be protecting us think it's fun and games until someone loses an eye (or a life).

I've posted the following graphic before, but I'm posting it again, because it says it all. It appeared at the top of the Lima SWAT team's web page prior to the Wilson killing, before they took it down:

Any questions?

Radley Balko points out this remark from Berwyn Heights Mayor Cheye Calvo, which I think ranks among the best commentary we've heard in the press following a botched raid:

"The reality is that this happens all the time in this country and disproportionally in Prince Georges county and most of the people to whom it happens don’t have the community support and the platform to speak out. So I appreciate you paying attention to our condition but I hope you’ll also give attention to those who may not have the same platform and voice that we have." [CNN video via Rawstory]

This was broadcast nationally on CNN, which clearly takes the paramilitary drug raid controversy to a level we haven't seen previously. Unfortunately, the rise of this issue from a frequent topic at drug policy and libertarian blogs to a full-blown national concern has followed the path many of us reluctantly predicted: something horrible had to happen to an appropriate spokesperson.

We knew it was just matter of time, but I wasn't expecting it to come so soon. Maybe I should have. In the short-term, we can look forward to likely reforms in Prince George's County and hopefully even at the state-level in Maryland. But what this means in the long-term is that future incidents carry greater potential to be recognized by the press as part of a disturbing pattern. Too often, botched drug raids generate obligatory local media, while the larger issue goes unaddressed. Bloody fiascos are dismissed as isolated incidents only to be forgotten and eventually repeated.

Let it therefore be understood now and remembered when the time comes that there is nothing isolated or unusual about innocent people and pets being shot during poorly executed drug raids. It happens all the time and this latest controversy should provide an ample imperative for those covering such incidents in the future to connect the appropriate dots.

PolitickerMD sent us a copy of their latest editorial cartoon, about the killing of two dogs by a Prince Georges County, Maryland, SWAT team:

Click here for the original article.

By the way, the Lima, Ohio, SWAT team, whose officer was just acquitted for the killing of Tarika Wilson and the maiming of her infant child, killed two dogs too. They shot people on one floor and dogs (pit bulls) on another.

To be fair, the guy they were targeting supposedly unleashed the pit bulls on the officers who came after him downstairs. But that's no excuse -- he was defending himself from invaders of unknown nature who as far as he could tell intended to kill him -- had they not sent in a SWAT team for this minor situation, none of it would have happened at all.

Virginia: "There is Some Hope"

"Those who have no concern for the plight of former criminals - regardless of how much these individuals have done to turn their lives around - should know that alienating ex-offenders does nothing more than pressure a return to criminal behavior," writes Brandon Patterson, the director of Resource Development at Virginia CARES Inc. in a Roanoke Times commentary. In Virginia, there are approximately 300,000 citizens with previous felony convictions. Because of disenfranchisement laws, they're banned from voting, but Gov. Tim Kaine has expedited the review process for petitioners with non-violent criminal records. Applicants were to submit an application to the Secretary of the Commonwealth by August 1. If their application is approved, they will be able to register for the November election. "The key to turning back voting laws is to empower the individuals affected by them," stated Patterson.

Kentucky: Governor's Move to Restore Rights "Makes Every Kind of Sense"

Saying they've completed their sentences and paid their debts to society, Gov. Steve Beshear has granted more than 700 "partial pardons" to citizens with felony convictions over the last five months, allowing them to vote, the Associated Press reported on July 29. "The primary goal of the corrections system is to rehabilitate those who have committed crimes and return them as contributing members to society," said Gov. Beshear. The move also restores the right to serve in office, but not to possess firearms.

"Beshear has done the right thing. Now the General Assembly should follow his lead," states a Lexington Herald-Leader editorial on the governor's efforts to make voting more attainable for citizens with felony records. Formerly, citizens seeking vote restoration were required to submit an essay and three letters of recommendation before former Gov. Ernie Fletcher would even consider restoring voting rights. As a result, few Kentuckians regained their right to vote, the Herald-Leader stated. Earlier this year, Gov. Beshear eliminated that requirement and extended the time prosecutors have to protest a petition. He's since restored voting rights to 790 people and denied requests to 56 based on objections by prosecutors. During Fletcher's four years in office, voting rights were restored to 1,098 citizens. During the last session of the General Assembly, the House passed a bill that would automatically restore voting rights upon sentence completion, but it died in the Senate.

Following suit, the Courier Journal editorial board also supported Beshear's efforts stating that, "it makes every kind of sense for Gov. Steve Beshear to have restored voting rights" to these individuals. "Giving convicts a stake in decent society, and its democratic processes, is not only the just thing to do but the smart investment to make."

Tennessee: Voting While (Unknowingly) Disenfranchised

While activists push for voting rights restoration, the state is tracking down voters who have illegally cast ballots over the years - because they hadn't realized their rights hadn't yet been restored, according to the Leaf Chronicle. The article reports that the Tennessee Department of State Election Division actively tracked individuals with felony records. Larry Neal was arrested even though he filed to have his rights restored in 1999 and has voted since 2001. "He had made efforts to reinstate his voting rights and had got confused - it wasn't intentional" said Public Defender Crystal Myers. Neal's case was eventually dismissed, but there continues to be a discrepancy in people's understanding of the policy. In fact, Myers said many of her clients with felony convictions who may be receiving food stamp benefits registered to vote through the Department of Human Services.

Terry McMoore, of the ACLU of Tennessee, is working to get legislation passed to streamline the re-enfranchisement process. "It really bothers me," said McMoore. "We're trying to get the voter rights restored, and it's been simplified ... but that's another felony charge and you have to start all over again."

Pennsylvania: Preventing Disenfranchisement

A panel discussion sponsored by the YWCA's Downtown office of Racial Diversity and Inclusion in Pittsburgh focused on re-enfranchisement efforts on behalf of formerly incarcerated citizens. Politicians, journalists, and advocates attended the event as panelists and attendees to discuss how to better educate the community at large on voting rights, working polls and registering jail inmates and individuals with felony records, according to a Pittsburgh Courier article. " Anything that prohibits the vote of the public should be challenged," said Tim Stevens, a panel participant and founder and chairman of the Black Political Empowerment Project. "Anytime the government starts discussing new policies for voting, it should raise a red flag for society."

Panelists described state laws that allow those incarcerated for a misdemeanor or on parole or probation (with the exclusion of being a resident of a halfway house) to vote. Those incarcerated with misdemeanors are required to use an absentee ballot. "We don't want the most vulnerable to be disenfranchised because they are vulnerable," said Celeste Taylor of the Black Political Empowerment Project. "We must be vigilant and persistent in helping each other."

National: Punishment Versus Basic Rights

Marc Mauer, Executive Director of The Sentencing Project and Roger Clegg, President and General Counsel of the Center for Equal Opportunity, debated each other on disenfranchisement in the Washington Examiner. Mauer's argument stated two key reasons to oppose disenfranchisement: "First, in a democracy everyone's voice should count; we should be wary of any attempt to restrict the right to vote based on perceived political views, loyalty or behavior. In fact, there is no evidence that people with felony convictions have significantly different views on defense policy, taxation, abortion or any other issue of concern to most Americans. Voting is also important for reasons of fairness and public safety. People living in the community on probation or parole supervision, or who have completed their felony sentence, are subject to all the obligations and responsibilities of other citizens. They work, pay taxes and support their children. Denying them the right to vote only communicates a message of second-class citizenship."

Clegg's response stated that some felons should be allowed to vote, but be based on the seriousness of the crime, how long ago it was committed and the rehabilitation of the released citizen. "To participate in self-government, you must be willing to accept the rule of law. We don't let everyone vote; children, noncitizens and the mentally incompetent don't. Voting requires certain minimum, objective standards of trustworthiness, loyalty and responsibility, and those who have committed serious crimes against their fellow citizens don't meet those standards."

Nicole Kief, state strategist for the ACLU Racial Justice Program wrote a blog offering an historical overview of voter disenfranchisement in addition to the successes advocates in several states have gained recently. She writes: "Felony disfranchisement's nasty roots in voter suppression should remind us that promoting access to the polls for all eligible voters is fundamental to the health of our democracy."

Florida: Continue Momentum, Disband Disenfranchisement

Contesting a Palm Beach Post editorial which praised Gov. Charlie Crist's efforts to restore voting rights to 115,000 citizens with felony offenses, Mark Schlakman pointed out several misleading claims featured in the piece. According to the Parole Commission, Schlakman stated, the 115,000 individuals whose rights were restored "included about 90,000 cases that date back to the early '80s and about 25,000 more recent cases pending final action by the board. Therefore, the 115,000 figure appears to be at least somewhat illusory." He also pointed out that more than 300,000 older rights restoration cases identified by the Department of Corrections for review last spring were deemed ineligible under the new rules. Schlakman further broke down the administrative process: the Florida Department of Corrections transmits the names of about 4,000 additional ex-offenders to the Parole Commission for rights restoration review each month after they are released or their probation is terminated. The reality is that the rights restoration process must be reengineered to address the public interest and the needs of ex-offenders.

"With another stroke of his pen, Gov. Crist, with support from at least two Cabinet members, could restore the civil rights of many more ex-offenders who have completed their sentences, enabling them to register to vote. Only then will the rights restoration process reflect the fundamental fairness that the governor has been talking about," Schlakman concluded.

Prior to last year's policy change, an average of about 7,000 persons got back their rights each year, according to the News-Press. There are now currently 1,000 cases that come in monthly and 57,000 cases await eligibility notice. Marshall Bland recently received his eligibility notice. "It's something that I thought would never happen," he said. "Now I'm going to do everything in my power to give back to my community. And voting can help." Still, the News-Press and the Florida Times-Union reported many do not know that their rights have been restored, or know about the policy change.

"I walked around with my head down, thinking I can't vote," a newly restored voter, Charles Russell, was quoted as saying in the Florida Times- Union. "Come to find out, it's a totally different story. I can voice my opinion now instead of being pushed back in a corner."

In an effort to continue momentum and completely erase disenfranchisement practices in the state, the Florida Rights Restoration Coalition (FRRC) held its statewide annual convention in Tampa, where police, advocates, professors and formerly incarcerated individuals discussed the ramifications of losing civil rights. FRRC is pushing for an amendment on the statewide ballot that would automatically restore voting rights, WMNF 88.5 FM reported. Also in support of reform is Alachua County Commissioner Cynthia Chestnut who is encouraging all residents to register to vote and update addresses, the Gainesville Guardian reported. "I'm very pleased that felons that have paid their debt to society have the opportunity to vote and make a difference in the elections" Chestnut was quoted as saying. "It's imperative for felons to know and follow through in the process to get their voting fully restored."

Alabama: Father, Son Disagree on Disenfranchisement Policy in Op-ed

A father and son battle out the issue of disenfranchisement in a pro-con op-ed featured in the Montgomery Advertiser. Mel Cooper Sr., the retired executive director of the Alabama Ethics Commission supports disenfranchisement while his son, Mel Cooper Jr., president of an online consulting firm, asks his father why Annette McWashington Pruitt of Birmingham should lose her rights because of a 2003 felony conviction for receiving stolen property. "Before you answer, Dad, you should know that Ms. Pruitt apparently is not one of those apathetic (non-)voters you were moaning about a few weeks ago. She really does want to vote and had every intention of showing up at her local voting precinct on Election Day like every other citizen in Jefferson County," wrote the son.

The father responded: "Well, Son, without even knowing which major crime Ms. Pruitt violated, I cannot work up any sympathy for her, nor can I reward her for having served a prison term by restoring her right to vote in any election."

- - - - - -

Help The Sentencing Project continue to bring you news and updates on disenfranchisement! Make a contribution today.

Contact Information -- e-mail: zjennings@sentencingproject.org, web: http://www.sentencingproject.org.

Join us for a pre-Kennedy Center Show Preview at the Prison Art Gallery in Washington, DC to benefit the legal defense fund of our director Dennis Sobin (arrested for going to City Hall to speak at a

A Boston cop goes to prison for being muscle for drug dealers, and a Miami-area cop and two prison guards get caught up in a massive Oxycontin and health fraud scandal. Let's get to it:

In a July 31 ruling, California's 4th District Court of Appeals upheld the state's voter-approved medical marijuana law against a challenge from conservative county supervisors in San Diego and San

In a trial that garnered national attention because of the conflict between state and federal marijuana laws, a federal jury in Los Angeles Tuesday convicted the owner of a Morro Bay medical mariju

The Peruvian Constitutional Tribunal, the Andean country's highest court dealing with constitutional issues, announced Wednesday that it had overturned a law approved by the Department of Puno that

Indonesia's harsh drug laws have not succeeded in stopping illicit drug use in the Southeast Asian archipelago, and now some of the people those laws are aimed at are speaking out.

DEA agents are in Vietnam this month to train Vietnamese anti-drug officers how to conduct drug raids American-style, but local UN officials say you can't police your way out of a drug problem.

An all-white jury found Lima, Ohio, Police Sgt.

In a July 31 decision, the Arizona Court of Appeals has held that there is no religious right to possess marijuana.

The fallout following Rachel Hoffman's murder is becoming intense. DEA has refused to allow three agents to testify before a grand jury regarding their involvement in the case, resulting in a surprising backlash from the State Attorney's office:

State Attorney Willie Meggs has told the Tallahassee Democrat that his decision to no longer prosecute cases involving the federal Drug Enforcement Administration is, "probably more symbolic than it is substantive, but I am very serious about it."

He went on to say, "I'm just not going to play that little game with those folks. I don’t need them and if these agencies want to work with them and do their cases with them, that's fine." [Tallahassee Democrat]

Strong words indeed. This sort of vitriol is rarely exchanged between drug warriors and it seems to indicate a drawing of battlelines as we wait to see who'll be held to account for this now-legendary drug war f#%k-up.

Mark R. Trouville, DEA's Special Agent in Charge of the Miami Field Division, predictably blamed his officers' non-compliance on a technicality:

We feel it is important for the public to know that DEA did not refuse to testify before the grand jury in this case. Although notified both verbally and in writing by DEA, the State Attorney’s Office refused to comply with Department of Justice regulations (which have been respected by the Florida Supreme Court) and therefore DEA Agents did not receive authorization to testify before the grand jury. In order to comply, the State Attorney’s Office simply needed to issue a subpoena and provide the local United States Attorney’s Office a summary of the information sought and its relevance to the proceeding.

This is the same guy who once claimed that today's marijuana "will kill you," so he has all the credibility of a drunk frat-boy on April Fool's Day. Thus I lean towards the assumption that DEA is covering its ass, which would explain why State Attorney Meggs is raging pissed.

To be honest though, I'm really not quite sure what the hell is going on here. I don't understand DEA's role in the murder because they won't testify, but in hindsight the fact that Rachel was told to purchase 1,500 pills of ecstasy, 2 ounces of crack cocaine and a gun sure gives the impression that DEA may have been calling the shots. The conspicuously large order Rachel placed had a great deal to do with her cover being blown, so to whatever extent DEA may have been responsible for that, they would be equally responsible for the fatal outcome.

Ultimately, many people made many errors contributing to this horrible event, but we all know that it takes more than a few greedy cops to manufacture a tragedy as compelling and gut-wrenching as this. After the finger-pointing subsides, after a few sacrificial reassignments, re-trainings and procedural revisions, the war that killed Rachel Hoffman will rage on without missing a beat. The culture of threats and manipulation that characterizes modern drug enforcement will remain intact and the mentality that led to Rachel's death will continue to guide police as they take on the drug problem with handcuffs in one hand and a gun in the other.

Looks like there will be no accountability or apologies for one of this year's worst botched drug raids:

A white police officer was acquitted Monday in the drug-raid shooting death of an unarmed black woman that set off protests about how police treat minorities in a city where one in four residents is black.
…

Chavalia shot 26-year-old Tarika Wilson and her year-old son she was holding, killing her and hitting him in the shoulder and hand, during a Jan. 4 SWAT raid on her house. One of the child's fingers had to be amputated.
…

Chavalia, an officer of 32-years, had testified that he thought his life was in danger when he fired the shots. He said he saw a shadow coming from behind a partially open bedroom door and heard gunshots that he thought were aimed at him. It turned out the gunfire he heard was coming from downstairs, where officers shot two charging pit bulls. [ABCNews]

So police shooting innocent dogs downstairs became an excuse for police shooting innocent people upstairs. I'm never surprised to see a jury (an all-white jury, no less) ruling in favor of police in a case like this. Still, I can’t get over the officer's admitted failure to even observe what he was shooting at. An officer who panics and fires at "a shadow coming from behind a partially open bedroom door" is incompetent at best, but clearly criminal if we're to hold police to anything approaching the same vicious standards applied to civilians in these raids.

I shudder to contemplate the sort of carnage it may require to get out the message that modern drug war police tactics are not a necessary precaution, but rather a genuine and growing threat to public safety.