Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

marmar

(77,077 posts)
Sun Dec 22, 2013, 12:16 PM Dec 2013

Why the Right to a Fair Trial Doesn't Really Exist for Drug Defendants


Why the Right to a Fair Trial Doesn't Really Exist for Drug Defendants

Sunday, 22 December 2013 10:18
By Crystal Shepeard, Care2 | News Analysis


Sandra Avery is a veteran, having served in the Army and army reserves. A survivor of childhood sexual abuse, she had overcome a crack addiction and went on to earn a college degree, eventually working as an accountant. By her mid-forties, she was married to a crack dealer and selling drugs for him to support her own resurfaced addiction. In 2005, she was arrested and indicted by a federal grand jury for possessing 50 grams of crack cocaine with intent to distribute. She is now serving life in prison.

The severity of Sandra’s sentence had little to do with her possession of a small amount of crack cocaine. She was punished for refusing to plead guilty and insisting on a jury trial.

Earlier this month, Human Rights Watch released a report about how federal prosecutors force drug defendants to plead guilty. The report highlights the devastating effects of mandatory minimum sentencing for non-violent drug offenses. The sentencing requirements cannot be overridden by judges and gives prosecutors incredible power over how much time defendants serve.

As a result, 97% of all federal drug defendants forgo their right to a trial.

This prosecutor power is used regardless of how minor the part the defendant played in the operation. According to the report, “An addict who sells drugs to support his habit can get a 10-year sentence. Someone hired to drive a box of drugs across town looks at the same minimum sentence as a major trafficker caught with the box. A defendant involved in a multi-member drug conspiracy can face a sentence based on the amount of drugs handled by all the co-conspirators, even if the defendant had only a minor role and personally distributed only a small amount of drugs or none at all.” ................(more)

The complete piece is at: http://truth-out.org/news/item/20783-why-the-right-to-a-fair-trial-doesnt-really-exist-for-drug-defendants



4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Why the Right to a Fair Trial Doesn't Really Exist for Drug Defendants (Original Post) marmar Dec 2013 OP
life sentence seems very harsh PowerToThePeople Dec 2013 #1
I heard about this on NPR, the judges should be put in jail or impeached at the LEAST uponit7771 Dec 2013 #2
This is my problem with plea bargaining pipoman Dec 2013 #3
shameless self-kick marmar Dec 2013 #4
 

PowerToThePeople

(9,610 posts)
1. life sentence seems very harsh
Sun Dec 22, 2013, 12:39 PM
Dec 2013

Did she kill anyone? I am not a fan of overly harsh drug sentences. I prefer drug-rehab if possible.

In the end, drug and substance abuse issues are a symptom of a much deeper problem. We need to isolate and solve that root problem.

 

pipoman

(16,038 posts)
3. This is my problem with plea bargaining
Sun Dec 22, 2013, 01:12 PM
Dec 2013

Prosecutors file charges not supported by the evidence with excessive sentence possibly, then blackmail defendants into pleas instead of charging them with a crime supported by the evidence. .happens all the time.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why the Right to a Fair T...