Martha Stewart began her five month prison sentence today at a Federal Prison in Alderson, West Virginia.  I am not a fan of hers, and I have never seen one of her programs.  However, what has happened to her should be a wake up call to all the civil libertarians who cherish the civil rights guaranteed to us by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  Ms. Stewart was not convicted of insider trading, or stock manipulation or any other crime along those lines.  She was charged with, and subsequently convicted of obstruction of justice.  The obstruction of justice was her lying to the FBI.  She was not under oath when she allegedly lied to the FBI. As a matter of fact, she was not even required to talk to the FBI.  The first question is why did her attorney not advise her not to be interviewed? If nothing else, he should be sued for malpractice and his ineffective assistance of counsel should be the basis for appealing her conviction.

The Fifth Amendment of the Constitution guarantees your right against self incrimination.  That means that you cannot be compelled to testify in court if you are the defendant in a criminal trial.  You protection also applies to interviews by police as per Arizona v. Miranda.

The government could not get her on insider trading, so they created the obstruction of justice allegation because she allegedly lied while she was being interviewed by the FBI.  The government was going to get her one way or the other.  They simply had to make an example out of her.  This is a nation of laws, and laws were never made to make an example out of someone.  Is she loses her appeal, this miscarriage of justice could become case law and it’s far reaching effects could be endless.  The FBI and the United States Attorney’s Office could opine that any false and/or misleading statement made to the FBI is obstruction of justice.  They could go so far as to say that it makes no difference that you were unaware that you were not telling the truth at the time you made the statement.  The fact is you lied period.  

The trend to dissolve our Constitutional Rights got into full swing when the so called war on drugs was initiated in the 1980’s.  The public’s perception of crime is a far worse than the reality.  Reporting crime is the mainstay of the news media, whether broadcast or print.  Politicians are well aware that in order to be elected to office you must be hard on crime.  Nearly everyone running for public office is trying to outdo their opponent by being a law and order candidate.   The people of this country are paying a high price for this trend both economically and with the erosion of our rights.  

The core theme that was used to promote the war on drugs was zero tolerance.  What does zero tolerance mean?  It means that Federal judges have no discretion when sentencing a defendant convicted of a drug offense.  Horror stories abound about young people in their early twenties doing life sentences in Federal prisons for a single drug offense.  The money the Federal government has pumped into state and local communities has made local governments addicts to Federal funding.  Who can even estimate the amount of law enforcement officers who have been corrupted by the large amount of cash that floats loosely around the underground economy?   Local police officers and deputy sheriffs along the Interstate 95 corridor on the east coast are patrolling the interstate looking for suspected drug couriers instead of protecting the communities where they paid to protect.  There is simply more Federal dollars in arresting interstate drug couriers than in protecting a community from burglars, etc.  A disastrous side effect has been the implementation of drug profiling.  Unlike profiling done by the US Customs and Drug Enforcement Agency where several factors are used to profile a suspected drug courier, local law enforcement uses a very simple criteria, stop any car with either Florida or New York license plates being driven by either a Black or Hispanic. Until recently there were no specific laws outlawing such racial profiling.  The only “law” that seemed to apply was the 14th Amendment.  Books could be written about the disastrous effects the war on drugs has had on this country.  The war has been worse on the American people than the illegal drug trade has.  

The concept of seizing someone’s vehicle was borne out of the war on drugs.  Until recently no one really cared since it was only drug dealers and couriers who were losing their cars.  Besides, they were loaded with money and could easily replace any vehicle the government confiscated.  The government didn’t even need to charge an individual with a crime in order to seize their vehicle.  The decision was up to the law enforcement agents.  What happened to the 4th Amendment?  The Feds got away with it, so now local governments are doing it for such things as facilitating the solicitation of prostitution.  An alleged misdemeanor with a maximum fine of about $1,000.00 can cost you your $30,000.00 car without even being charged, much less convicted of the crime.  

Don’t look to so called liberal politicians for relief.  Mayor Jerry Brown, an alleged liberal, testified before the Los Angeles City Council on the merits of seizing vehicles used to by individuals who solicit prostitution.  He said the program had been an overwhelming success in Oakland, California.  I am not sure he really believes what he said.  But I do know that if he is perceived as being soft on crime that would be the kiss of death for a politician.  

Former Governor Gray Davis was of the same mind set when he refused to allow anyone convicted of murder to be paroled from a state prison.  If an individual is convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to 15 years to life, that means he/she is eligible for parole after about 15 years.  Life without out parole is a sentence for first degree murder.  The parole process is detailed and thorough.  It is not something that is done on a whim.  The law provides for parole, but Davis chose to ignore the law and deny parole to anyone.  He did however parole a total of there inmates during his time in office.  Governor Arnold, who has been in office less than one year, has allowed 48 inmates to be paroled.  

The Home Security Act was passed in the heat of the moment after 911.  Most of the representative and senators have conceded that they didn’t read the entire bill before voting on it.  I must admit that I haven’t read the statutes created by the Homeland Security Act, but the early warning signs of tyranny are there.