In any criminal case, the state has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant has committed the crime with which he or she has been charged. Barring cases in which the defendant has either been caught red-handed either in possession of or distributing illegal drugs, or has been caught in a law enforcement sting operation, the evidence required to establish guilt may be difficult to come by. And given the fundamental shift in public attitudes toward less-dangerous drugs, convictions could well become more difficult to obtain. Below are a few of the challenges that law enforcement and the criminal justice system are facing in their efforts to stem the flow of illegal drugs.
1) Big money buys virtual immunity in many cases. Since the sale and distribution of illegal drugs is a multi-billion dollar industry in the U.S., many defendants have the financial wherewithal to retain highly-skilled legal representation, resulting in many defendants being acquitted or accepting “slap on the wrist” plea bargains. As a result, the criminal justice system has become something of a revolving door for many drug offenders, and many of the worst are back on the street plying their trade before the arresting officers are even through with their shift.
2) Law enforcement personnel are frustrated. When law enforcement personnel do their job, but see the individuals they arrest walking free within hours, the incentive for them to continue their efforts diminishes significantly. Especially in cases where the accused perpetrators are known to be affiliated with violent gangs or drug cartels, law enforcement personnel may sometimes decide that the end result doesn’t justify the effort or risk involved.
3) Public attitudes – and the laws – are changing dramatically. It wasn’t that many years ago that conviction for even a small amount of marijuana would result in a stiff sentence in virtually every state. Some of the more conservative states continue to classify marijuana as a Schedule 1 controlled substance, on a par with heroin and cocaine. Some even continue to issue mandatory life sentences for the mere possession of a trace of the drug. In recent years, however, many states – even among the more conservative – have lightened the sentences imposed, and some, such as Colorado and Washington State, have decriminalized the recreational use of marijuana altogether. In addition, in some states such as California, there has been an effort (albeit unsuccessful to date) to decriminalize the production of industrial hemp. And while the laws have not been significantly changed at the federal level, federal law enforcement agencies have begun taking a more permissive approach to enforcement in states where penalties have been lowered or where possession has been effectively decriminalized.
4) The scientific community challenges commonly-held notions about drugs. For decades, the primary response to drug abuse has been emotional, with little of the information made public having a basis in the actual science of physiological reactions to different drugs. Despite the continuing legal restrictions on the possession and use of minor recreational drugs, scientists are beginning to feel more comfortable applying for study grants and even conducting studies in well-know academic communities to determine the actual harm or benefit that occurs following the use of the drugs.
5) Jury Nullification can negate the efforts of prosecutors. With the availability of more objective information about drugs, a dramatic shift in public attitudes has resulted in an increase in one element of legal proceedings that no attorney will risk mentioning in the courtroom: Jury Nullification. In its essence, nullification occurs when a jury believes that a defendant is technically guilty of the crime, but they also feel morally compelled not to convict. In the past, nullification was often the product of a jury’s belief that extenuating circumstances, rather than criminal intent, led the accused to commit a crime. In the case of minor drug cases, however, public awareness of an historic tendency to over-punish, combined with more objective – and less damning – evidence about the real effects of minor drugs, has led some juries to shrug off the demand for a conviction.
As more information about minor drug use becomes available, and the veil of fear is lifted, it is inevitable that more and more states will continue to decriminalize the use of “recreational” drugs such as marijuana. It follows that such liberalization of drug laws will have a snowball effect, and that with each step toward decriminalization and even legalization, it will be more difficult for the remaining states and localities to uphold laws that were drafted, passed, and implemented, based upon incomplete or erroneous information. There will be a degree of backlash, and some states and municipalities will do their best to hold on to laws that more closely reflect community attitudes, but the die is cast, and at some point, even these “holdouts” will find it necessary to re-evaluate and recalibrate their positions, until eventually, laws that do more harm than good will be stricken from the books.
Author: Daphne Holmes contributed this guest post. She is a writer from ArrestRecords.com and you can reach her at daphneholmes9@gmail.com.
About BillTrack50 – BillTrack50 offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. BillTrack50 also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking, as well as easy ways to share information both internally and with the public.