Pubdate: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 Source: Eastside Journal (WA) Copyright: 2000 Horvitz Newspapers, Inc. Contact: 1705 132nd Avenue N.E., Bellevue, WA 98005-2251 Fax: 425-635-0602 Website: http://www.eastsidejournal.com/ CONVICT FIRST, BEFORE TAKING PRIVATE PROPERTY When police and prosecutors confiscate cars and cash from drug pushers, it's easy to cheer. Depriving them of their ill-gotten gains can serve as a powerful deterrent. But what if the person is innocent? Or only suspected of selling illegal drugs? Should law-enforcement authorities be able to seize their property, sell it and reap the profits? Under current state law, the answer is yes. Fortunately, a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers wants to change this practice. They've introduced legislation that would require a criminal conviction before government can seize private property. It's a long-overdue move that shifts the burden of proof back where it belongs: on the prosecution. The current practice flies in the face of Fifth Amendment rights against being ``deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.'' It also upends the basic premise of American criminal justice: that you're innocent until proven guilty. In our zeal to crack down on illegal drugs, we've also taken aim at civil liberties. We've allowed police officers and local prosecutors to confiscate homes, cars, boats and other property from people suspected of manufacturing, transporting or selling drugs. We also gave police agencies an incentive to confiscate property from suspected drug-dealers. Under state law amended in 1992, law-enforcement agencies could keep or sell the seized assets unless the owner was able to prevail under a civil appeals process. As a result, the budgets of local police departments and state anti-drug programs have benefited by nearly $45 million in that time. Not surprisingly, law-enforcement agencies don't want the property forfeiture laws changed. They believe it gives them a particularly effective crime-fighting tool and also a means to keep financing their war against drug pushers. However, the battle against illegal drugs should not mean depriving individuals -- even those suspected of being drug kingpins -- of due process. Senate Bill 5935 and its companion in the House, HB 1995, would change our state's seizure and forfeiture laws for the better. They would allow property to be taken only after the owner is convicted and a determination is made that the assets to be seized were found ``by clear and convincing evidence to have been instrumental in committing or facilitating the crime.'' Property used for evidence, such as drug paraphernalia, is exempted, of course. Sponsors of this legislation include liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans. We encourage lawmakers from both parties to pass SB 5935 and its companion bill in the House. Property should be secure from the government unless a person's guilt can be proved in a court of law. - --- MAP posted-by: Keith Brilhart