Shunning suspected drug dealers (even if they're still a suspect)
There was an interesting post at the Miller Park Neighborhood Association Blog earlier this week dealing with a local anti-crime initiative...one that up until this afternoon, I never knew existed. It's called the Stay Out of Drug Area (SODA) program, and is basically a legal electric fence around known drug dealing hotspots designed to keep out hooligans. It's been in the works for the past year, and looks to become a reality in the very near future.In a letter to the public, King County's Senior Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Ellen O'Neill-Stephens provides more details:
Seattle Police precinct commanders have identified geographic locations in their precincts as high narcotics trafficking areas. These areas were identified as such based upon citizen and business complaints, crime statistics and police observations.On the surface this is a good plan: it cripples criminals by stopping them from doing business, while cleaning up neighborhoods in the process. Or at least that was what I thought until I saw the map with each SODA district clearly labeled (above, taken from MPNA).
King County deputy prosecutors will soon be asking Superior Court judges to order defendants arrested in these SODA zones to stay out of these zones as a condition of their pre-trial release. This order will also authorize the Seattle Police Department to contact and/or arrest defendants who violate the court's order.
I had expected 30-40 zones, a few blocks apiece. Not a chance. Instead, there are four zones, stretching from E. Prospect St. to I-90. These aren't just one or two city blocks; they're entire neighborhoods. By leaving the terms so broad, the idealists who designed this system seem to have gotten a bit too excited with their red pens. And I'm guessing that if SODA don't hold up to the Superior Court, these overarching borders will have something to do with it.
But wait. There's an even bigger problem. The SODA zones aren't aimed at ex-convicts or reputed gang members: instead, they mean to restrict those who have been arrested on drug charges and granted a pre-trial release. These people haven't even been tried for anything, let alone convicted of a crime...and it sounds like a very slippery slope.
I wasn't the only one whose inner libertarian perked up. A commenter at MPNA named Phil made a similar point to O'Neill-Stephens, who wrote back:
Judges often place restrictive conditions on a defendant charged with a crime. For example, judges almost always place no contact orders on defendants charged with assaulting others or stealing from stores. When a judge does this he/she is balancing the rights of the defendant with public safety issues or concern for the safety of alleged victims.Maybe. But to a lot of folks, there is a huge difference between telling someone they can't hang around a certain person or business and restricting them from a large portion of urban Seattle.
I'm not defending open-air drug markets; I see my fair share of them walking around the city and curse their very existence. Devotee readers of the blog will know I have little tolerance for societally disruptive criminality. But this draconian plan isn't the way to shut it down.
What is? Good question. I'm as lost for words as the next guy.
