Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 4024 AMERICAN POLICE BEAT: FEBRUARY 2017 Falling for media lies on forfeiture by Chuck Canterbury A midst the cur- rent national furor against “fake news” is another more pervasive issue of creating “fake issues” like the myth of policing for profit. There’s been widespread discussion about the need to end the Federal equitable sharing program because a journalist or columnist writes a sympathetic piece describing a case in which the system may not have functioned as intended. The FOP does not dis- agree that there is a need for civil asset forfeiture re- form. In fact, we worked very closely with Senator Jeff Sessions on this issue go- ing back to the Civil As- set Forfeiture Reform Act (CAFRA) of 2000. The law enforcement community came togeth- er to make the necessary changes to the program to ensure due process protec- The myth of policing for profit tions while preserving eq- uitable sharing as a critical law enforcement tool. In fact, the FOP was an early supporter of adminis- trative changes made to the program by then Attorney General Holder in January 2015. It is our hope that the next Congress and the next Ad- ministration will work with law enforcement, as Senator Sessions did in 2000, instead of against us. Not a single major law enforcement organization supported legislation end- ing the equitable sharing program – and that’s no way to begin. And yet, a herculean effort by the Obama Administra- tion established a Task Force on 21st Century Policing which issued a report con- taining 59 individual rec- ommendations and a large number of those call for new or additional federal funds for state and local law enforcement for a variety of purposes. Not a single one recom- mended reforming civil asset forfeiture programs or for ending the equitable sharing program. At a time when the num- ber of officers is declining, federal assistance to state and local agencies is evapo- rating and deliberate attacks on law enforcement officers are rising, how can this issue be a law enforcement prior- ity? Why are anecdotal ac- counts in the media sudden- ly making this a priority in the editorial pages of some newspapers? For over 30 years, the as- set forfeiture program has allowed law enforcement to deprive criminals of both the proceeds and tools of crime. The resources pro- vided by the equita- ble sharing program have allowed agen- cies to participate in joint task forces to thwart and deter serious criminal activ- ity and terrorism, purchase equipment, provide training upgrade technology, engage their communities, and bet- ter protect their officers. It has been remarkably suc- cessful. We need to understand just how thinly stretched law enforcement has become in the past decade. We are increasingly called upon to do more and more – including calls for service outside our training param- eters – with less and less. It’s a cycle we no longer stay ahead of. The funds and resources generated by the equitable sharing programs are of great value to law enforce- ment, to public safety and to the community, as states use these shared funds for a wide variety of purposes. In New Jersey, for ex- ample, forfeiture funds were used to purchase a supply of naloxone (Narcan) which is now carried by law enforce- ment officers in that state. Naloxone is used to reverse the effects of opiate (usually heroin) overdoses and is ad- ministered by nasal spray. Between July 2014 and September 2016, more than 852 lives were saved. What better metric for a successful program is there than lives saved? Like any govern- ment program, there can be found instanc- es of abuse and the FOP supports mea- sures to combat such abuses and to improve the integrity of the program. However, to end a de- cades-long program which is worth hundreds of millions of dollars to our nation’s communities and has docu- mented success in deterring and fighting crime based on anecdotal media reports is simply not sound public policy. The FOP is ready to work together on asset forfeiture reform with the new Con- gress and the new Attorney General and we are con- fident that we can protect the due process rights of our citizens without losing the ability to use the profits of criminals and terrorists to make our communities safer. Chuck Canterbury is the Na- tional President of the Fraternal Order of Police, the oldest and largest law enforcement labor organization in the country, representing more than 330,000 members nationwide. P resident Trump says that com- puters can’t be trusted, so if you want to keep something secret it’s best to write it down and have it delivered by bike mes- senger. He’s got a point. People’s email content seems to be dominating the news re- cently. And in Baltimore, there’s a new twist. According to the Baltimore Sun, “Baltimore officials said they cannot provide the emails of a top police commander who oversaw a controversial aerial sur- veillance program this year because his email account was not configured properly and the records were not retained as required by state law and city policy.” Here’s where it gets a little murky. Marcos Zarragoitia is the former chief of the Police Department’s Home- land Security Division. He resigned last year after the city’s agreement with a contractor and some wealthy donors hit the front page of the newspaper. The agreement allowed a private Ohio-based com- pany to fly a Cessna air- plane over Baltimore taking photos and gathering other “intelligence.” Zarragoitia was hired on Sept. 10, 2015, and resigned a year later. No one has been willing to say what led to his resignation. So why wasn’t Zarragoi- tia’s email stored the way it should have been? A spokesman for the may- or’s office explained. “Upon accessing the sys- tem and searching the ar- chive, it was determined that archiving for the spe- cific individual requested was not configured in the archive manager,” spokes- man Anthony McCarthy said. The claim is that if the emails aren’t in the archive they can’t be retrieved. Baltimore police spokes- man T.J. Smith said the city and the Police Department will be trying to figure out what went wrong. “We are very interested in drilling down to figure out exactly where this process went wrong,” McCarthy said. “We will rely on our Law Department to assess the sit- uation and advise the mayor on where we can close any loops in this regard.” Is there anything at all going on with anything that doesn’t have to with these damn emails? There is no way we can keep doing more with less.