November 25, 2005

Get A Clue, ACLU

Law enforcement works hard to keep our cities and towns as crime free as possible. When they get tips about criminal activity, they often do long investigations to get all the proof they need in order to prosecute the crime. This costs a lot of money, takes a lot of manpower, and should be respected. Along comes the ACLU. Defending the criminals.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) came to the defence of the two US-based Indian shop owners, charged with selling a highly addictive drug, calling the police operation in the case as ''ill conceived''. ''There are too many unanswered questions about the validity of evidence against these store clerks for the prosecutions to go forward in good conscience. We have launched a full investigation to determine the extent of police misconduct in this ill-conceived operation,'' Christina Alvarez, a staff attorney with the ACLU Drug Law Reform Project said in a statement yesterday.

Once again, the ACLU is busy defending non-Americans. Wasting more money to start a "full investigation" that has already been done.

Two convenience store owners, Falgun Patel and Sudhirkumar Patel and workers of Indian origin were recently arrested for selling items that could be used to make methamphetamine, a highly addictive drug that is sweeping the rural United States. The civil liberties group promised a thorough investigation into claims that law enforcement selectively targeted the Indian community based on national origin and race in ''Operation Meth Merchant''. It said besides the Patels, more than three dozen other Indian merchants were targeted in the sting operation, which was carried out in coordination with the US Drug enforcement Administration. Of the 49 retail clerks and convenience store owners charged, 44 were Indian. Many shared the same last name -- Patel.

Law enforcement will not look into possible crimes/criminal activity if they don't have good reason to do so. In spite of what some want us all to think, LE knows a strong case vs. a weak one. Unfortunately, groups like the ACLU jump in and make such a big fuss about these things- it undermines the time and effort put into the case. For this particular case, it sounds like the ACLU came along to defend a NAME and NATIONAL origin...I say they are using this case to further their agenda.

Federal law prohibits merchants from selling products knowing -- or with reason to believe -- the products, which could be used to manufacture methamphetamine. But in the aftermath of the 18-month investigation, several of the 44 Indian suspects claimed a language barrier confused the process. At least three suspects claim that they were misidentified by the police informants who secretly taped the alleged transactions using hidden microphones or hidden cameras. Besides taking up the case against two of the accused, Falgun Patel and Sudhirkumar Patel, the ACLU has launched an investigation into claims of selective arrest and prosecution based on national origin and race. If successful, such claims could result in the dismissal of all defendants' cases based on the fact that the US Constitution prohibits prosecution based solely on national origin and race.

Did you read the part that said-- 18 months? Why would any LE agency spend THAT much time on a case based soley on RACE and ORIGIN? Get a clue, ACLU.

Cross Posted @ ARS

Show Comments »