Fanatical prosecutor pursues a personal vendetta - Scribbyworld

DA Capeless: Zealot or tough cop? You decide.
03/25/06
In Berkshire County, Massachusetts, reputed rock-ribbed bastion of enlightened lifestyles, you can go to jail for two years for an offense that's the equivalent of a speeding ticket, especially if you are a foolish teenager, and have never had another offense. That's how it works under the regime of power-crazed District Attorney David F. Capeless whose taste for being both prosecutor and judge - and therefore being the dictator of punishment - is expressed in a fanatical devotion to mandatory sentencing laws and an unbalanced relish for inflicting prison terms on unsuspecting pot smokers careless enough to swap a bit of their personal stash with an undercover cop.

It goes down this way: on a warm summer day in June two years ago, 17-year-old Mitchell Lawrence, having just completed his junior year at Monument Mountain Regional High School, gets up mid-morning, puts on shorts, a blue T-shirt, and sneakers, grabs his bike and pedals the 12 miles from his home in the tiny hilltown of Otis to the center of the village of Great Barrington. As he does several times a week, he's heading to the parking lot next to the movie theatre and behind Main Street stores where he regularly meets friends.

They lounge around, go down to the river for a swim, or maybe go up beyond the railroad tracks to smoke a little grass. He knows it's wrong - the pot - but it's part of the youth culture -his friends do it, lots of his friends do it, not everyone but lots - and it doesn't seem dangerously risky. It's socially acceptable.

As an air-headed teenager, he doesn't think about eating breakfast because most of the food in the fridge are things he doesn't particularly like anyways. And as an air-headed teenager, he forgets to bring any money with him. In his shorts pocket, though, he does have a couple of joints worth of marijuana and his pipe.

When he gets to the Taconic Parking lot around noon, he hooks up with a couple of friends, and they take a stroll up the ramp by the Triplex movie theatre, cross upper Railroad Street, and slip into the obscurity of the bushes around the tracks.

What he and his friends don't know is that under orders from District Attorney Capeless, the Berkshire County Drug Task Force had mounted a four-month sting operation in that parking lot, complete with surveillance cameras, a command post, an undercover agent, and roving SUVs to trail the agent. - firepower and paraphernalia worthy of a big city bust.

The merchants had been complaining again about loitering groups of adolescents. And law enforcement had been under pressure from the media to crack down on hard drug trade, especially heroin. Why not kill two birds with one stone by staking out the Taconic parking lot, a popular town meeting ground.

What Lawrence also doesn't know is that the lot is within 1,000 feet of a church preschool, allowing the district attorney to deploy his harshest prosecutorial weapon, selling a controlled substance within a school zone, vacant and dormant though the school may have been, a charge that carries a two-year minimum mandatory prison sentence if the district attorney chooses to apply it.

When Lawrence with his pals get back to the parking lot, high on grass, he seees a familiar face, a guy he knows as Jose who's been hanging out with the kids a lot lately. He's older - about 30 - Puerto Rican, muscular and intimidating. He's also, in reality, Detective Felix Aguirre, employed by the Drug Task Force, a veteran from the urban drug wars in Springfield, the state's third biggest city and one of its poorest. He's been ordered to purchase drugs as many times as he can from individuals he spots among the kids spending time in the parking lot - and particularly to secure multiple buys from the same person, providing a better case for the charge of dealing within a school zone.

"Jose" has already picked out Lawrence as an easy mark: shy and diffident, and an obvious pothead. He's just the one to help him meet his quota.

"Hey, have any smoke?" Jose says to Mitchell. "Let's go for a walk."

Lawrence thinks they're going to smoke a few bowls. Jose has other ideas. The youth follows the older man out of the lot, and up a side street to a parked car that's discreetly hidden by a tree.

"Got any smoke?" Jose asks again. Lawrence pulls out his nearly empty baggie. "I'll give you 20 for it," Jose says.

Lawrence hesitates - it's more money than it's worth - but he says, "OK." He hands over the pot and takes the $20 bill. He thinks to himself, "I'm starved. Now I can get a burrito at La Choza." But he's uneasy. It's the first time he's ever sold any grass outright, rather than sharing. It doesn't feel right. And later that summer, when Jose asked again, Lawrence turns him down.

In fact, that was the only transaction for money Mitchell Lawrence did that summer, in the four months of an undercover sting that was designed to lure kids into selling, if that was what they had a mind to do. Nor had he ever been charged for any other offenses.

It is not surprising, therefore, that Mitchell Lawrence was astonished and frightened one September morning when, while taking a shower, he heard someone pounding on his parents' front door. He wrapped himself in a towel, and peeked out the window. There were no cars in the driveway or on the road, but seven or eight men were walking around on the lawn down below. He quickly put on his clothes, and went downstairs. The pounding on the door resumed. They did not identify themselves. He went to the sliding door on the back deck. There as a man there who beckoned to him. He opened the door a crack, and the man said,
"Are you Brian Babcock?"

"No," said Lawrence. The man did not say who he was, nor did his clothes identify him. Lawrence was scared now.

"Are you Mitchell Lawrence?"

"Yes."

He opened the door a little more, and the man pulled him out by his collar. The others surrounded him. He was handcuffed and told he was under arrest for selling drugs in a school zone. A police van showed up, and Lawrence was taken off to the Great Barrington Police Station for booking.

A year and a half later, Mitchell Lawrence was put on trial, on a bitter cold week in March.

The jury was not informed of the mandatory two-year prison sentence, a penalty so out of proportion to a crime that it might have influenced their decision. Indeed, had Lawrence's offense occurred outside a school zone it would have been deemed a misdemeanor. Nor did the judge, although sympathetic to the circumstances of the case, allow the jury to consider the issue of entrapment.

The matter was, therefore, decided on the narrow grounds of whether a transaction, as defined by the law, had in fact taken place. The jury found Lawrence guilty, and he was sentenced to two years in jail. He was conveyed immediately to prison. He will not be finishing his senior year at Monument Regional High School.

One of Lawrence's friends, B.J. Crandall of Otis, had attended the three-day trial to show his support. He could not believe the outcome.

"This is totally retarded," he said, as sheriff deputies marched his friend out of court in cuffs.

With their mandatory two-year minimum sentences that do not allow judges any discretion, school zone drug dealing laws are meant to discourage real drug dealers from preying upon innocent children. But even the prosecutor conceded in court that Mitchell Lawrence was not a drug dealer. So in this case, just exactly who was this arrest meant to protect? Children two blocks away in a preschool that wasn't in session? Hardly.

But if not them, then who is the actual victim? In a cruel twist of fate, Mitchell Lawrence turns out to be the victim, for the real predator here is District Attorney Capeless. He did not have to apply the enhanced school zone charge but for motives of his own - personal perhaps or to enhance his political career - who knows - he decided to. And he continues to do so in similar first-offender cases.

Instead of pursuing the cruelest of penalties, Capeless might have used the authority of his office to advocate for education and treatment, for rehabilitation that included intense community service for situations such as Lawrence's. But Capeless scoffs at such programs, declaring that the only treatment for drug dealers - though his office says Lawrence isn't a drug dealer - is prison time.

There's been some talk among a grassroots organization, Concerned Citizens for Appropriate Justice, of finding a candidate to oppose Capeless in the November election. So far, they can't get a commitment from anyone who has the determination to bring Capeless to account for this tragic travesty of justice - and for future travesties. He is the only district attorney in Massachusetts who applies minimum mandatory sentences against first-offender, small quantity marijuana cases. Other DA's find this tactic deplorable and excessive. Besides, it hasn't worked. Pot smoking hasn't declined a whit. But the political machine of which Capeless is a member in good standing, is formidable, the legal community is complacent.

And there's been some talk of changing the law itself, as other states have done, because it is ineffective and unfair, a conclusion reached by a comprehensive study conducted by the Boston University School of Public Health. But in an election year, so far there isn't a Berkshire legislator courageous enough to call for re-examination of minimum mandatory sentencing laws for first-time school zone drug offenses.

In the meantime, Mitchell Lawrence is in prison, committed to the school that produces real criminals, and has become another notch on the gunbelt of a prosecutorial zealot and hitman.

Please send in your ideas, observations, and queries for this column: by e-mail to bibblings@scribbyworld.com; by using the comment button below; by phone at 413-441-4307; or by dropping by the Starving Artists Detective Agency, 467 North St., second floor, number 12. Call first. We may be out on a case.

3/26/2006
sounds crazy to me. prehaps the da has nothing more important to do in a sleepy comunity. how did he get into this position?

3/27/2006
Folks should read George Orwell's book, "1984" again if not new for the first time. It is the best entrapment book ever, and how soon we forget the tactics of the Nazi's, who brought down whoever they wanted, even babies. Who could oppose? Who could stand up against the injustice?
Who can stand up against this present injustice?
Only time, or the very bravest. If you oppose, you could end up across the hall from Mr. Lawrence after your home, posessions and life have been destroyed by the inquisition.
Start at the top. Who did we elect? We elected representatives. Do those kids have one of those?
We might as well have elected poultry.

3/27/2006
I don't know Lawrence but he seems like so many kids I knew in high school, and even myself. He's the kind of kid, fumbling a little perhaps as most adolescents do, that is probably basically a good kid that should feel empowered and supported by the community around him -- he, as most of us, would have found his way in the end and gone on to be an adult who makes better decisions. But now he'll be lucky if he'll ever be able to BE a part of the community. Who will hire a convict who has served time? Hopefully your writing and the responses of your readers will let him know that we, the community at large, if not our "justice" system, see him as a human being who only messed up a little. Very little on the larger scale of things in this world. It's scary to think back on all the stupid things most of us do as kids his age as little acts of rebellion and independence and wonder how many times we ourselves could've been slapped with jail time under this kind of regime.

3/27/2006
we all need to stand up - and stop this NOW. What if it was someone you knew , what if it was your son or daughter making a stupid adolencent/teenage mistake. What kind of venomous human being does not give a kid a second chance. This is not justice; and we need to take a stand against it before it spreads even more. His actions have brought out the worst in neighbors,have polarized our good commiunity have fueled the fires of a mob mentality.This is one of the most sickening examples of prosecutorial abuse I have ever seen and my heart goes out to this family in our community that had to bear his viscious assault.

There are no winners here; hopefully it will be a wakeup call for our community to remove capeless from the public sector. He stains the fine office office of the DA and betrays the public trust thru his vengeful and counterproductive persecutions.

3/27/2006
THE HANGMAN

By Maurice Ogden

Into our town the hangman came,
smelling of gold and blood and flame.
He paced our bricks with a different air,
and built his frame on the courthouse square.

The scaffold stood by the courthouse side,
only as wide as the door was wide
with a frame as tall, or a little more,
than the capping sill of the courthouse door.

And we wondered whenever we had the time,
Who the criminal? What the crime?
The hangman judged with the yellow twist
of knotted hemp in his busy fist.

And innocent though we were with dread,
we passed those eyes of buckshot lead.
Till one cried, "Hangman, who is he,
for whom you raised the gallows-tree?"

Then a twinkle grew in his buckshot eye
and he gave a riddle instead of reply.
"He who serves me best," said he
"Shall earn the rope on the gallows-tree."

And he stepped down and laid his hand
on a man who came from another land.
And we breathed again, for anothers grief
at the hangmans hand, was our relief.

And the gallows frame on the courthouse lawn
by tomorrow's sun would be struck and gone.
So we gave him way and no one spoke
out of respect for his hangmans cloak.

The next day's sun looked mildly down
on roof and street in our quiet town;
and stark and black in the morning air
the gallows-tree on the courthouse square.

And the hangman stood at his usual stand
with the yellow hemp in his busy hand.
With his buckshot eye and his jaw like a pike,
and his air so knowing and business-like.

And we cried, "Hangman, have you not done,
yesterday with the alien one?"
Then we fell silent and stood amazed.
"Oh, not for him was the gallows raised."

He laughed a laugh as he looked at us,
"Do you think I've gone to all this fuss,
To hang one man? That's the thing I do.
To stretch the rope when the rope is new."

Above our silence a voice cried "Shame!"
and into our midst the hangman came;
to that mans place, "Do you hold," said he,
"With him that was meat for the gallows-tree?"

He laid his hand on that one's arm
and we shrank back in quick alarm.
We gave him way, and no one spoke,
out of fear of the hangmans cloak.

That night we saw with dread surprise
the hangmans scaffold had grown in size.
Fed by the blood beneath the chute,
the gallows-tree had taken root.

Now as wide, or a little more
than the steps that led to the courthouse door.
As tall as the writing, or nearly as tall,
half way up on the courthouse wall.

The third he took, we had all heard tell,
was a usurer..., an infidel.
And "What" said the hangman, "Have you to do
with the gallows-bound..., and he a Jew?"

And we cried out, "Is this one he
who has served you well and faithfully?"
The hangman smiled, "It's a clever scheme
to try the strength of the gallows beam."

The fourth man's dark accusing song
had scratched our comfort hard and long.
"And what concern," he gave us back,
"Have you ... for the doomed and black?"

The fifth, the sixth, and we cried again,
"Hangman, hangman, is this the man?"
"It's a trick", said he, "that we hangman know
for easing the trap when the trap springs slow."

And so we ceased and asked now more
as the hangman tallied his bloody score.
And sun by sun, and night by night
the gallows grew to monstrous height.

The wings of the scaffold opened wide
until they covered the square from side to side.
And the monster cross beam looking down,
cast its shadow across the town.

Then through the town the hangman came
and called through the empy streets...my name.
I looked at the gallows soaring tall
and thought ... there's no one left at all

for hanging ... and so he called to me
to help take down the gallows-tree.
And I went out with right good hope
to the hangmans tree and the hangmans rope.

He smiled at me as I came down
to the courthouse square...through the silent town.
Supple and stretched in his busy hand,
was the yellow twist of hempen strand.

He whistled his tune as he tried the trap
and it sprang down with a ready snap.
Then with a smile of awful command,
He laid his hand upon my hand.

"You tricked me Hangman." I shouted then,
"That your scaffold was built for other men,
and I'm no henchman of yours." I cried.
"You lied to me Hangman, foully lied."

Then a twinkle grew in his buckshot eye,
"Lied to you...tricked you?" He said "Not I...
for I answered straight and told you true.
The scaffold was raised for none but you."

"For who has served more faithfully?
With your coward's hope." said He,
"And where are the others that might have stood
side by your side, in the common good?"

"Dead!" I answered, and amiably
"Murdered," the Hangman corrected me.
"First the alien ... then the Jew.
I did no more than you let me do."

Beneath the beam that blocked the sky
none before stood so alone as I.
The Hangman then strapped me...with no voice there
to cry "Stay!" ... for me in the empty square.

THE BOTTOM LINE: "...I did no more than you let me do."

3/27/2006
I find this whole thing terrible. Yes, the kid made a mistake but the rapists, robbers and even DWI's are not treated so radically.They get off easier!!! The proposed punishments will destroy these kids for life!!! Yes,the kids that were involved, or will be in the future, need to be punished BUT the punishment should fit the crime. What do we do to get the law changed - just tell me and I'm with you.

3/27/2006
Thank you for taking the time to write this illuminating piece about Mitchell Lawrence. I was sent it in a forward by someone I haven't even corresponded with for 2-3 years.

I think they sent it to me because I once tried to help a heroin addict get clean. He lived in the building above the Taconic parking lot. He was in and out of rehab-detox clinics for years, and finally got clean, miraculously without jail time. The few times he was arrested were outside Berkshire County. It always seemed strange that they never busted him in Great Barrington.

Atty. Capeless did do a job that the local force was unwilling to do. BUT, he did it in such an extreme way, and the net result was NO heroin addicts/dealers were caught; instead a bunch of youths were, and the sum total was less than one ounce of pot for 18 kids. Most had no prior offenses.

They are charged with felonies which will be with them forever. I am so not in favor of jail, for addicts/youthful potheads. They could've used dogs like they did at Monument Mtn. High School, to "scare" them.

The local police should've done more to go after loiterers, vagrants OR the hard-core stuff. We need more counselors, clinics, compassion. I am totally outraged that our tax dollars have been spent on this undercover drug bust.

Meanwhile, a knife-wielding kid with bipolar disorder has confessed to a killing; a kid who haunted the same parking lot. Two other murders (stabbings) remained unsolved.

3/30/2006
Thank you for writing a well-written column illuminating the absurdity of archaic drug laws that politicians pass from a "tough on crime" stance to the detriment of our youth and our community as a whole. This is a TRAGEDY. It is simply a tragedy, and if any possible good can come out of it, it should be the catalyst for reforming the drug laws of Massachusetts and making sure that this D.A. never succeeds in "serving" this community again. A special task force spending 4 months with sophisticated surveillance to "bring down" 8 kids for a total of less than an ounce of marijuana! This is where our tax dollars are going? Not to healthcare, or education, but 4 months of surveillance on a group of kids who have small amounts of marijuana? This is the year 2006; where are our priorities as a society, as a community, as rational human beings?

Capeless had enormous discretion in this case to end the future of a 17 year old kid, or to charge him with a misdemeanor. I sincerely hope that the public takes action and makes sure that this DA is never re-elected. He should be considered criminally incompetent and held responsible for sending a kid to criminal college, instead of university that actually produces contributing members of society. As Paul Hawken astutely writes, "It costs the same to send a person to prison or Harvard. The difference is the curriculum." It is time that we as a larger society stand up to the absurd idea that sending this kid to prison is rehabilitative, and recognize that he will leave prison at the age of 19 with a felony record. He will not be able to receive financial aid even if any school would accept him, and his entire life's job prospects will be severely, severely limited.

I hope Capeless receives a thousand letters or protest until he is run out of town. I hope this brings the community together to protest archaic mandatory minimum sentencing and to lobby the state legislature to change the law so that a 17 year old kid will never again be put in prison for 2 years for a gram of a plant.

If not us, who? If not now, when?

3/31/2006
Ain't it a shame, Capeless is making it harder and harder to find a good place to sell drugs on the streets of Berkshire County. Shame on him.

But, if the legislators are too gutless to gut the law, why are you ragging on him...they guy who's enforcing it?

4/1/2006
Back when this thing started, I thought, gee, there was a big leap between drug doers and drug dealers when I was coming up. Only the truly bold and flagrant lawbreakers dealt, because the penalty was just too stiff for any sensible human. Now this guys says he accidentally got caught dealing. What a hilarious defense. Too bad it didn't work. You don't accidentally deal drugs. You do it because you think you can get away with it. All these school zone cases typically plead out because the DA squeezes the small fish to get the big ones. That's how it works. It's why you don't have crack whores flagging down cars in Great Barrington - yet. But this guy has to take his chances and go trial. Well, it failed. Too bad. He took his chances and he lost . The sob story account you write here is just laughable to 99.9 percent of the people in this county which makes you a joke, too.

4/1/2006
A drug deal is the equivalent of a speeding ticket? Is that a joke? We don't think it's funny. By the way, you are the most disgraced man in Western Mass. journalism.

4/2/2006
Every single official involved in this "8 month investigation " should be held accoutable for its incredible lack of success.What a sad and dismal failure the whole operation was. Why didn't they arrest any big dealers, why didn't they get heroin or oxycotin dealers, people part of a criminal enerprise that actively distributes these drugs to our community.Why didn't they get pounds and pounds of pot?

Real dealers in my mind , are in the business of selling drugs and the more the merrier. That's how any commercial enterprise works, right? You want to sell a lot. So get real; these were mostly kids shuffling drugs among themselves.

This whole sting is a fraud. They should have called it off when it became clear that all they had were the lowest hanging fruit -- the very bottom of the drug distribution food chain. That's not what a real long term operation is about. It's about getting the real dealers; it's about working up the food chain, not down and not deceiving the public.

They threw out a wide wide net, caught mostly minnows, and now hide behind rehtoric as if they actually caught the big fish. A wasted opportunity is what the sting was. It could have really benefitted the community if these guys actually did their job. Without the school zone -- a purely technical violation -- there was not enough drugs collectively, among all 18 defendants, to make a serious charge. Next time we launch a long-term drug intervention operation, I hope it actually does its job.

4/2/2006
All dealers are bad dealers. Period. And there were hundreds arrested and charged and convicted in Pittsfield this year, including one of the biggest dealers in Western Mass., but no one wants to talk about that. They held a press conference about it and it got a tenth the coverage of this crap. This is the most idiotic mentality I've ever seen and the fact that so much attention is being paid to "rights" of drug dealers would be hilarious if it weren't so serious.

4/2/2006
"Real dealers want to sell alot..." That must be why Sawin had that handy scale in his backpack. But he was just "just a kid swapping joints."

4/2/2006
I just attended the ecumenical protest service for Mitchell Lawrence on the courthouse steps, along with what looked like about 75 others. People from all walks of life were there -- and many denominations of faith. A Selectman, many ministers, parents. Lawrence's parents held up his photo, moving words of sympathy were expressed; stronger words were spoken by ministers who see this as a terrible blow to our community.

Lawrence did not hope to avoid prosecution. He hoped to get a fair deal; it was a first offense, with just a little more than one joint.

There is a movement growing to change the drug laws, because the original intent is now impinging on civil rights. Lawrence was the tipping point.

I am saddened that there is such lack of sensitivity in our D.A.'s dogged pursuit of these kids. Beyond that, he has such ignorance of how the drug scene works. "Dealers" have guns, large amounts, aliases, usually prior offenses. This kid lived with his parents, rode a bike.

The amount of money the D.A. spent could've begun a clinic. The local police could've used it to beef up patrols.

People were motivated enough to come on a Sunday night to protest. And the energy is building. May it bring a change in the drug laws, a better way of addressing the (true) drug problem. The tyranny has to end.

4/3/2006
To the brave men of law enforcement who put themselves at risk in going after real drug dealers I applaud you. But calling these kids dealers and saying they deserve two years of hard jail time for first offenses is counterproductive and taints the valuable work you do to protect the community. Same for treating small scale pot like heroin or crack: it's wrong to demonize these kids and you know it.

It takes public opinion which should be squarely behind you and screws it up -- and the reason is the ridiculous and extreme application by the DA of the school zone. He makes you guys look like the bad guys because of his own vendetta. He's the problem -- not all the folks in the community who believe a two-year sentence is way out of proportion and totally inneffective. If he acted like any other DA, these cases would have been resolved and the community would not be polarized.

4/4/2006
Like with any predator it is easier to pick off the smaller weaker animals of a herd. I'm sure all the hard core drug dealers are grateful to Capeless for concentrating his efforts on recreational smoking boys who sell what's left of a stash for some munchie money, than on the more professional drug dealing. At the very least Capeless picking on the young eliminates the amateur competition. I'm sure by time Mitchell gets out of prison he'll have made some interesting new friends, learned some new tricks of the trade, and though he did not go into jail as a drug dealer, there is a greater chance he'll come out as one, or worse. Thank Capeless for his re-education. He can build his campaign on the bodies of misdirected youth, rather than the professional criminals who know when and where not to sell, unlike Mitchell. He was just an easy target. Somehow I don't feel safer knowing he went to prison. It's time we redefine what is considered justice and what is considered law.

4/4/2006
For some bizarre reason you people are making this very personal. That, combined with the association with weird gong ringing monks is not doing you any favors. Capeless has put thousands of drug dealers in jail, big and small. The reason these people are going to jail is that they are going to trial. Wake up. They should have come forward and offered to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem. I guess the CCAJ told them they could get off but it didn't work the second time. Tough luck.

4/4/2006
The bad news for all of us in the community is that the approach -- tough or otherwise -- employed by Mr. Capeless doesn't work. If it did drug use would be going down -- it is not, and drug arrests would also be declining -- they are not. More snitches, more small scale arrests more of the same has not yielded results. It's broken and it's time to try a different approach -- especially targeting real drug dealers, criminal enterprises, that one would have expected an eight-month sophisticated longterm investigation to snare.

Here's another bizarre idea: catch the real dealers to begin with instead of wasting time and effort on small scale stuff and rewarding them with relief if they rat out the next guy on the food chain.

Why doesn't the DA try a similar sting in Pittsfield in the area like the parking lot in Great Barrington where kids hang out? No doubt he can catch another batch of kids. Let's see how that plays out with his constituents in that community.

4/4/2006
I applaud the work of our law enforcement. What's up with the witch hunt? The DA doesn't make the laws! If you don't stop the "small time dealers" they turn into big time dealers, addicts and worse! I think that the amount of money that has been spent on advertising in favor of drug dealers and against the DA is disgusting. Please. We've got your point. Now donate it to the Brien Center or the McGee Unit.

4/5/2006
Just about every single week in Berkshire County, the North Adams, Adams, Lee, Dalton and Pittsfield police departments, as well as the sheriff and state troopers assigned to the DA's office and other members of the Berkshire County Drug Task Force are catching drug dealers. Every week. The court records are public. So your argument that your neighborhood small timers are being targeted instead of bigger ones is simply false. The idea that drug use is up in the county and nationwide must mean that the fight against drugs is not working is just ridiculous. You people need to start with your personal and parental responsibility.

4/5/2006
Why do the few folks who applaud this two-year conviction believe so strongly in such severe punishment for an 18-year-old kid convicted for the first time? I don't get it. Why do you believe that spending $90,000 sending him to jail is a good thing. What about $90,000 for PREVENTION AND TREATMENT? Why isn't a more proportionate punishment OK with you guys?

Isn't it possible that this kid and others would alter their behavior -- not do it again -- without ruining their lives with a permanent felony conviction? I know you think all society's problems will dissappear with this conviction but they won't.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

4/5/2006
Yeah, I like that idea: Go catch a bunch of pot kids in Pittsfield high schools and prosecute them under technical school zone violation and let's see how that works.

The ridiculous part of all of this is that any other DA would have worked these cases out and avoided all this crap -- all of it. He is the problem.

4/5/2006
I just read this thing -- give the kid the right punishment -- like any other first-time offender. And guess what? All this divisiveness goes away, and the community -- law enforcement, DA, parents, treatment folks -- all continue to work together to deal with the difficult issues of drug abuse. But this absurd application of a two-year sentence blows all that away and leaves a community divided. Really, really bad judgment, Mr. DA.

4/5/2006
This last kid may have gotten screwed but why didn't he cut a deal?
All the DA's use the school zone to trade up. That's why they don't go to trial. The punishment may have been severe but it's been severe for years so why don't you work to change the law? I'll tell you why, because you want to:
1. Pressure the DA which didn't work.
2. Create jury nullification which is illegal.
3. Get your way using money because that is your way.

4/5/2006
No way to know, but was the DA offering a deal? I doubt it. It's not like the kid and the lawyer can go to the prosecution and say they want to cut a deal -- has to be the other way around, doesn't it? And with this two-year mandatory sentencing having been enforced by the DA himself, I can't imagine he would WANT to offer deals to these kids.

4/5/2006
When was the last time a first-time offender was sent to jail for two years for such a small amount of pot? Did it ever happen before? If it did, was it a technical violation or something that really occurred in a school or to school kids? This is nuts. I can't believe some people think this is OK.

4/5/2006
That is serious misinformation you are spreading about the other DAs. It's simply not true. At least two other DA's do exactly the same thing. Exactly. What you don't seem to get is that these cases do not go to trial, mostly never, either here or elsewhere. Deals for cooperation are struck, and there were cooperative members of the"Taconic" group. Cooperative, do you understand that? This stupid kid's stupid lawyer let it go to trial. So yes, this is stupid but once again, not the DA's fault. Why are some not cooperating? That is the question. Does anyone know the answer?

4/6/2006
Is "cooperate" the same as ratting out another low level pot kid? Some other goofball who sells a couple joints to their friends now and again. Wow! What a great way to run a DA's office: Don't take responsibility for your actions, turn on a friend and you get a reward. How about this: catch the real drug dealers to begin with and the small-time first offenders get a reasonable punishment that holds them responsible -- a plea that happens 99 percent of the time in other mandatory sentence cases. Casting a wide net and not distinguishing among the kids is wrong -- on every level. With all the investigations and deals and cooperation where are the drug dealers who are bringing heroin and large quantities of drugs into that community? Nah! The model of squeezing the smallest fish is a poor one and has no value to anyone. Who are other DA's who rigidly and without using any judgment slam school zones on any case possible? Especially first offenders, especially small pot sales and especially when the whole shooting match is a TECHNICAL violation of the law and at odds with the legislative intent? What other DA would press these cases in superior court?

Change is a good thing -- especially when facts demand it. His approach does not work -- he should meet with objective experts in the field of drug abuse and deterrence, read the recently published school zone study and change his harmful, ineffective approach which is dividing our community instead of uniting us to deal with this difficult issue.

4/6/2006
Here we go again with people spewing opinion instead of fact. In most areas of the state, a very large percent of busts made carry the school zone charge because of the location of most sellers within the school zone. This is a penalty prosecutors use to gain information about other dealers. Obviously, what's sought is bigger and better things. This does not mean a top down approach is not also used to catch major dealers. Major dealers are caught here all the time. This is not a friendly place for dealers. Also, Berkshire County is a bit different than others at this time in that our law enforcement is not yet having to focus on things like meth labs blowing up in trailer parks. They can afford to be tough on dealers of all manner. Please know something about what is going on here before spewing more opinion and misinformation.

4/6/2006
One of the things that strikes me reading all the varied views here and the story is the difference in opinion regarding pot versus other drugs. An awful lot of people smoke or have smoked pot and went on to be productive "normal" members of society. They cycled through it. That's not condoning it � just recognizing the reality. But here it appears the DA's office and the enforcement community believe that pot -- and someone who sells even a minute amount of it -- is to be treated the same as a dealer in heroin or crack cocaine. It's a message that does not click -- that just makes no sense and diverts our attention and resources from the more dangerous drugs -- including alcohol -- a far greater threat to our heath and kids safety than pot. Treatment education and reasonable sanctions are the far better path then rigid prosecution. The problem here does not appear to be the enforcement side -- they were caught doing something illegal; the problem is how the DA's office has prosecuted these kids.

4/6/2006
Cooperate and ye shall be set free...
Bring me the head (no pun intended) of other little pot dealing soon-to-be-cooperators and be saved! Onward!!

4/6/2006

Here is a study, just released on the ineffectiveness of school zone statutes:

http://www.justicepolicy.org/article.php?id=571
Please read and forward to public officials who execute this policy.

Key findings on the failures of drug-free zone laws include:

Drug-free zone laws do not serve their intended purpose to protect youth from drug activity. A Massachusetts study of drug enforcement in three cities found that less than one percent of the drug-free zone cases actually involved sales to youth. Analysis of hundreds of Connecticut drug-free zone cases identified just three such cases � all involving students arrested on school grounds. In Connecticut and Massachusetts researchers found that most of the sales occurred outside traditional school hours. Contrary to fears of drug dealers on playgrounds, Utah�s Sentencing Commission found that most sales actually occur within a residence that simply happens to be located within a zone. �The purpose of drug-free school zones was to protect children and schools by insulating them from drug activity,� said New Jersey Assistant Attorney General Ron Susswein. �Our intention was to create a safe harbor for children by pushing the pushers away. Unfortunately, the current 1,000-foot zones have failed to achieve that objective.�

4/6/2006
Be sure to tell them when you forward this report that the Justice Policy Institute is an advocate for prisoners. They forgot to mention they may be a little biased.

4/6/2006
Oh well, I guess he won't be selling any more pot to our kids.

4/6/2006
Hey, genius -- he wasn't selling pot to your kids -- he sold 1 gram to your slick undercover dude -- bravo great job -- whoopee -- you really nailed a drug dealer. Hope you get your jollies knowing you screwed up a kid for the rest of this life with a felony conviction. Nice...

4/6/2006
So why did he go to trial? If it were me, I'd sure as heck go for a deal. The lawyers know that's how it works. Something is strange here.

4/6/2006
The study that you refer to as biased is based on facts and numbers. The only thing biased is your inability to see the reality of what is going down. Go challenge the research -- call them on it if you think it's BS -- otherwise, try reading it and seeing what it says. Maybe, just maybe, you'll see what they are talking about and why these laws are being reviewed and changed by thoughtful legislators. I won't hold my breath ... but maybe
you'll read it.

4/7/2006
The people who are attemting to create the guise of a polarized community are the CCAJ. Capeless has enforced the school zone for 15 years. They're the ones who made a story out of it by pushing for a jury trial, persistent letter writing, thousands of dollars in ads, billboards, protests and now a prayer vigil. They have kept it in the media for a year because they were trying to make it look like a grassroots effort when it is classic astroturf campaign. All of the legalize drug crowd pulls this stuff all around the country on a daily basis and has for years. The web is full of sites where activists teach people how to do it. Astroturf is typified by lots of money and not lots of people. Grassroots is real people and little money.
In fact, the CCAJ is the reason these cases went to trial in the first place because these dealers were clearly emboldened by the CCAJ and their campaign and efforts to taint the jury. It worked once and it didn't work once. The second case is the fault of the CCAJ and the defense.

4/7/2006
How can any normal rational person call the kid in this article a "drug dealer"? Dude - he sold one joint or so one time to some undercover guy -- over eight months! This sure looks more like an alpha dog vendetta than anything else. Totally ridiculous - but really sad for this kid and his family

4/7/2006
"In fact, the CCAJ is the reason these cases went to trial in the first place because these dealers were clearly emboldened by the CCAJ and their campaign and efforts to taint the jury."

Wow! What are you smoking? That is one of the most remarkable distortions of all time!!!! CCAJ was formed specifically because after several meetings with the DA he made clear he would fully prosecute each and every kid - no deal. And their lawyers also tried, in vain, to get the DA to be more reasonable. So a 17-year-old who no other prosecutor would have pursued with such a vengeance sits in a jail cell. This is the sole responsibily of the DA. Period.

Over this 15 years of enforcing these laws, when was the last time a sting operation was used to fully prosecute seven kids with no records for small scale pot? I suspect the answer is this is the first time.

Please try the same undercover effort in Pittsfield where the local high school kids hang out and see how the community embraces the policy.
My guess is that they will do exactly what the people of Great Barrington did, and the 2,000 people who signed a petition asking the DA to use his discretion and dole out a reasonable punishment.

There was a simple and effective solution available at the beginning of all this: Look at each individual case, make the punishment fit the crime. But the DA chose to pursue another path. That is his right and he will be judged by it. You may applaud the decision; I do not, but that's what makes a democracy. But make no mistake. These trials were his doing.

4/7/2006
Again, we must point to facts, not lies. Anyone who's followed this idiocy knows the CCAJ had already been formed and had distributed a petition with their letterhead on it, in advance of any meeting with the DA. Also, several other defendants met with investigators and cooperated; some even testified in court. It's public knowledge that they are going to get consideration for that cooperation. Is that what you call no deal?

4/7/2006
Sweet - two years in jail for one joint and where's the idiocy? Sure looks like the article got it right. Take the credit!

4/7/2006
How 'bout catching real drug dealers to begin with? Then you don't need all these kids to rat out on each other. It would be one thing if they would lead you to dangerous killer drugs, but you are chasing minor pot sales - totally absurd the whole thing. Shame on you.

4/8/2006
Have we all given up on Mitchell Lawrence? Even if the school zone laws are ultimately changed, he will have served his entire sentance and then some. I would think that a petition demanding the commutation of his sentance would garner enough support to get Gov. Romney's attention. Even D.A. Capeless should not be offended. He got his conviction. He upheld the law as he interprets it.He might even take the moral high ground and support the petition.

4/8/2006
I say the kids who"cooperated" to try and convict their friend and spare their own butts should get the harsher sentences. What about owning up and taking responsibility for your actions? What about their defense lawyers actually defending their rights instead of playing lapdog with the DA's office? They now have an albatross to bear and what benefit came of it? One thing to force a kid to help an investigation if it leads to something worth getting; another to turn him into a tattletale/snitch for no valid purpose.

Really bad model and defective strategy.

4/8/2006
Great idea for the petition for a commutation of sentence. However, if the DA' s office opposes the application- and they will be asked - there is no chance of success. Highly unlikely that his office will change its tune as Capeless continues to portray Mitchell as big bad drug dealer. But anything is possible and it would sure be a great thing for him to do.

4/10/2006
A growing group of police, judges, prosecutors and others with long experience on the front lines of the so-called "Drug War" find stories like this abhorrent and use it as just one example of why we urgently need to end 21st century Prohibition.

Law Enforcement Against Prohibition http://leap.cc is based in Medford but has a membership of over 5,000 across North America and in several other countries.

Illegal drugs are the only ones aggressively marketed to minors. It is only illegal drug dealers who actively recruit minors to help distribution.

We quite sensibly regulate the production and commercial distribution of the most risky, dangerous and addictive drugs - alcohol, tobacco and pharmaceuticals. It's time for an equally sensible policy for all other in-demand drugs. Citizens and criminal justice professionals who support LEAP's mission are welcome to contact me for information on how to get a LEAP Speaker into your local civic club, church group or school group (high schools and college). Thank you for creating this very important topic on your weblog.

Steve Heath - Media Relations - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition.

4/12/2006
If you are smart enough to realize you are being hoodwinked by a group that wants to legalize drugs, you can learn more about how you can help be part of the solution in your community by visiting http://www.pushingback.com

4/12/2006
No thanks, friend. The ONDCP promotes drug Prohibition and that empowers illegal and unregulated drug dealers. We believe that in-demand drugs are best produced and distributed by licensed, regulated operators. The ONDCP seems to be fine with billions of dollars in drug distribution being controlled by criminal gangs and unregulated dealers. The Reader at Large is thus presented with two disparate points of view on the best way to deal with in-demand drug production and distribution.

4/12/2006
It is time to rid the body politic of these crazy intolerant creeps. History will record them as the insane, Cotton Mather, witch-hunt villains that they are. Alas, that is too little too late for their hapless victims. So action is required lest we all bear the stain of their evil pogrom. This man Capeless is a criminal!

4/13/2006
This makes me want to puke vomit and throw up!
I wish I could say, that I am surprised, but
I am not. As a whole children/teenagers are
sentenced for Adult Crimes much harsher and severer, than Adults. I know this comment may be debateable and disagreeable with many, but the children/teenagers who are dry rotting in
Super Max Prisons and other adult facilities, are basically a hush hush.

This DA is a real live bastard and those are
total cowards living and breathing in that
City and State. He better be glad he doesn't
live in Cinti. or the State of Ohio - Me and the
other activists I know would take him out.
He would be gone.

4/17/2006

AlterNet, the progressive, San Francisco-based not-for-profit web news service, featured Great Barrington and Berkshire District Attorney David Capeless on its home page on Friday. In a story -- more of a commentary, but based upon facts . . . written by a convicted drug offender . . . the news service describes the the marijuana-sting operation in a parking lot which has sent one 18-year-old to jail and has several others on trial . . . and which has sparked a contested race for DA this fall. Laying aside the opinions of the author, the piece sums up nicely the facts of the situation -- although there is nothing from the DA. More than 120,000 people read AlterNet daily. As of tonight, more than 114 people had posted comments about the article -- with a good cross section of opinion.

Here's the link to the piece:
"Two years in jail for a joint," by Anthony Pappa
http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/34814/

Here's a profile of the author:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Papa

http://www.mfw.us/hopeful-opposes-capeless-in-race

4/17/2006
The DA is like so many others involved in the Drug War...it makes him a living! There was an article in the San Antonio Express News back in November discussing the merits versus problems caused by legalizing drugs. The argument against legalization was the number of jobs lost in the medical, law enforcement, corrections and legal fields, not health problems. It is unbelievable that we have a list of substances KEPT illegal solely for the reason that people are kept employed...talk about a crime. As far as the DA mentioned in this article...GET A ROPE!!!

4/17/2006
It's great to hear that Mr. Capeless will have someone who opposes him in the next election. That's what it takes. This "get tough on drugs" business needs to be looked at. It's easy to see why it's been such an abject failure: using the criminal justice system to address a public health concern is not smart science even though it's been sold as great public policy. Spending $70 billion a year on the drug war is downright stupid, unless your portfolio has a lot of CCA stock (Correction Corporation of America), as that's all the drug war has accomplished: making us the world's jailer with 5 percent of the planet's population and 25 percent of the world's prisoners. Most people who are hard core "lock 'em up" types make their living from the drug war (cop, prison guard, prosecutors, etc., etc.,) At least that's what I've found. Who else still thinks locking some kid up for selling a couple of joints is "good" public policy?

4/18/2006
In circulating nominating papers for Atty. Judith Knight, opposing David Capeless for district attorney, we got signatures very quickly, from all sorts of people. We did not have to tell them the story -- they knew, didn't care to hear more. They want Judith. They want the school zone charges to be used with sensible discretion. They question why so much attention is being given to first-offenders with small amounts.

We met a newcomer to our area, a woman with four teenagers. She had to move here to take care of her elderly dad, and did so reluctantly because she knew prior -- in CALIFORNIA -- about the Capeless bust. It terrified her, that her kids could be caught, so savagely. Sure, she educates them about drugs, but pot is not going to go away.

Do we want our jails full of teenagers? Why can't money be spent on our youth to help them to enhance their lives?

If the DA has gotten confessions and plea bargained with some, where did this get us? Giant busts of cartels? We all know drugs are available in every town in America, and they will continue to be.

The negative publicity for the town is very bad, and there may be other potential real estate buyers out there who will shun Berkshire County, for fear their kids will be jailed. Let's be known (in California and elsewhere) as a place that bravely fought the Draconian school zone laws, that said we want better things for our kids besides undercover cops squeezing them.

Drugs are only a symptom of what society fails to provide. We are missing the mark. If we felt prison was going to cure local drug problems, we'd be delighted Capeless was in office.

4/19/2006
We definitely do not want more people here determined to undermine drug enforcement and weaken our drug laws.

4/19/2006
Hey, here's an article about how they're cleaning up the drug dealers in another town-- by a REAL journalist.

Drug arrests pile up

By Christopher Lang and Roman J. Uschak Wednesday, April 19, 2006 11:52 AM EDT

NUTLEY, NJ - The numbers are growing and police are calling the problem alarming.

In the past three months, Nutley police arrested 32 individuals for allegedly either possessing or distributing drugs within the confines of the community.

Called �Operation Clean Sweep,� the Nutley Detective Bureau, at times with other law enforcement agencies in the state, has monitored these alleged suspects, waiting for the opportune time to strike. The result has been 32 people arrested, including John Russomanno on Friday at his Franklin Avenue home.

The recent arrest has Lt. Steven Rogers calling the growing drug problem and arrest rate �alarming,� adding that efforts such as the police �Clean Sweep Operation� and Public Safety Commissioner Carmen Orechio�s proposed ordinance, which tries to prevent loitering on school and the Nutley Library Property, are a direct result to the growing problem.

However, Nutley High School students see the measures being taken by the police as needed and said they are �long overdue.�

�I think it�s justified,� said a male high school student recently while having his lunch along Franklin Avenue.

Students were concerned about giving their names because of peers who are alleged to be involved or have been involved with the sale and possession of drugs.

�It�s nothing new to us,� said a female student of the drug situation, while calling the arrests �long overdue.� She said her grandmother was surprised to read about the recent arrests, while the student herself was not.

�They need to start cracking down,� offered another student eating lunch. �There are more people than just the girl who got caught.�

And the students were right.

Klotz is just one of 32 arrested as part of Operation Clean Sweep. Since Klotz was arrested March 10, 14 more arrest have been made � most of which have been Nutley residents.

Klotz, 18, was arrested during March by the police for allegedly dealing drugs. Five more adults were arrested two weeks later for allegedly possessing drugs as part of the police department�s anti-drug operation.

Several students said they are aware of drugs being dealt and used around the high school grounds, though not necessarily inside the school building itself. One female student said school drug usage is present at Franklin Middle School, although drug dealing was more of a factor at the high school.

One male student reiterated the fact that drug usage begins in the middle school and then carries over to the high school. He said that continued drug arrests wouldn�t be a bad idea.

Another male student walking on Franklin Avenue had no sympathy for the persons who were arrested on drug charges.

�They got what they deserved,� he said. �They got caught. It is their fault.�

�It�s about time,� added a female student walking along.

�It�s a good thing they got arrested,� said another male student while heading back toward the high school grounds near the end of lunch.

�I didn�t even know about the arrests,� admitted another student.

�You pretty much knew that it was only a matter of time,� said a third student, who then broke into a laugh.

�There�s a few kids I hope get caught.�

�I think the arrests are good,� said another Nutley High student who had just finished a cell phone conversation. �It�s about time somebody got caught.�

�Everyone kind of knows,� she added about the drug situation at the high school. �The worst part is that it is accepted as normal, but it shouldn�t be.�

But everybody doesn�t know, Rogers said, and it is the parents who are being left in the dark.

What police are finding out during this operation is that Nutley parents are not paying attention to their children. Rogers said on Monday, �A dozen kids have been arrested. That means a dozen households have been involved. Is it possible that a dozen households had no idea what was going on?�

But the answer, according to Rogers, has been yes. He said parents of the minors involved always seem �shocked� to learn that it is their child involved with drugs in some form.

�The parents of young people involved in this were stunned,� Rogers said earlier this week.

Rogers said the police may need to contact the schools and have a drug forum to help with prevention methods already undertaken by the district and the township.

But why now?

The drug problem in Nutley may seem new to residents, but Rogers said it�s not.

�The problem has been there. We just haven�t had the man power to deal with it,� he said.

Before police started to crack down on the possession and distribution drugs within the 3.4 square mile community, attention was focused first on the growing gang presence and later on the rash of burglaries.

Rogers said the size of the Nutley police force limits its capabilities to tackle large multiple issues.

When the gang presence was an issue, the detective bureau was being stretched to its limits. The burglaries exceeded the limits of the bureau�s staff and required extra assistance from the patrol division.

With those issues having been beaten down, Rogers said the detective bureau can focus on the drug activity, which has been growing.

As for Russomanno, he posted bail, which was set at $150,000. The latest suspect is alleged to have distributed or possessed drugs and has received 14 charges. Police are charging Russomanno with possession of marijuana, drug paraphernalia for distribution, anabolic steroids and anabolic steroids for distribution, drugs with the intent to distribute in a school zone, possession of a prohibited weapon, maintenance of fortified premise, possession of a firearm during controlled dangerous substance distribution and possession of cocaine.

Rogers said police had been watching the suspect for roughly two months. When police entered Russomanno�s home at 6:30 p.m., the suspect was not there, which Rogers said was expected.

Police had three hours to search the Franklin Avenue home and wait for Russomanno to return. Rogers said police were expecting a struggle, which is why they had received support from the Lyndhurst Police Department Tactical Strike Force. This force, according to Rogers, uses assault rifles and flash grenades, among other equipment that the local police do not have.

However, 32 is not enough for police. Operation clean sweep will continue until June 1, when Rogers and police officials believe the job will be complete.

�More arrests are forthcoming,� Rogers said.

Managing Editor Christopher Lang and Staff Writer Roman J. Uschak can be reached at 973-743-4040 or nutleyjournal@thelocalsource.com.

4/19/2006
"We definitely do not want more people here determined to undermine drug enforcement and weaken our drug laws."

I definitely do not want the kind of ineffective, wasteful fraud perpetrated on the people of Berkshire County to continue. Start effective policies for addressing drug abuse and leave the dark ages behind. The existing "policy" is broken -- it's time to fix it and have an open and informed debate about how to deal with this difficult issue.
But what we are doing now IS NOT WORKING.

4/19/2006
Not working for whom? A few drug dealers? If you want to do something, why not lift a finger to change the law? What happened to that? What happened to the effort to get the law changed? NOTHING. Because our legislators know it would never ever fly among the vast majority of the voting public, who could not care less if a few drug dealers go to jail.

4/20/2006
Mitchell Lawrence is not a drug dealer. He is a kid entrapped by a persistant and sophisticated undercover officer. Please tell me what we gain -- the public -- not the DA's office or any law efforcement agency -- but the public -- from his 2-year jail sentence. Do we gain by spending $90,000? I don't think so. Do we deter drug abuse? Not according to published studies and testimony by substance abuse experts. Do we reform Mitchell? You tell me what have we gained other than another piece of evidence that seems to lead lots of people to conclude that rigid enforcement and poor judgment by the prosecutor's office harms more than Mitchell Lawence. This is NOT how DA's across the country use mandatory minimum sanctions. A long-term investigation and a single count of a tiny amount of pot. Come on! He's no drug dealer. And you know it.

4/20/2006
Honestly, I just don't get this. The townspeople complain about drug activity so the police do something about it. People who get caught selling drugs are by definition of the laws that we have on the books, criminals. The police and the DA's job is to enforce existing laws. If someone decides to go to trial rather than assist the police, then a jury decides. Inevitably, we get the entrapment defence -- "The police made me do it." It's like this year's version of the Twinkie Defense.

4/20/2006
The DA used a cannon to squish a flea. The DA's job is to use his judgment and serve the public interest -- especially when he is vested with the power and responsibility of mandatory minimun sentences.

After a long-term investigation, you are supposed to catch bona fide dealers -- commercial criminal enterprises -- especially hard drugs that have and can kill. Mitchell Lawrence is not even a minnow and should have been offered a rational, reasonable plea bargain, not two years in jail for not turning on one of his friends. What would he yield, another kid who smokes pot? Maybe that's why he was tried. He was so damn low on the suppy foodchain he couldn't offer anything worthwhile to the prosecution.

4/20/2006
http://www.safety1st.org/beyondzerotolerance.html .
Let's enter the 21st century and work together. Read please.

4/25/2006
This is an absolute OUTRAGE. This kid in JAIL for two years? When I hear or read reports like this, I am appalled. We are in the dark ages with such policies and laws. Is there any possibility of the sentence being reduced or parole? An organized group trying to intervene on his behalf? Any options?

A 64-year-old mother

4/25/2006
http://www.ccaj.org/

5/20/2006
So I take it that Scribby is not big on the concept of personal responsibility. What 13-year-old today doesn't know that drugs are illegal? And dangerous! The kids who got caught up in the drug sting will hopefully stay straight, and maybe it'll save their lives and their health long-term. By the way, don't the parents share any of the responsibility in this?

5/21/2006

5/27/2006
It's great to have such an energetic crime fighter like Mr. Capeless available. Now, maybe if Capeless can spare a moment or two out of his busy schedule prosecuting suburban teenyboppers who smoke pot, he could find the time to go after the criminal narcoterrorists who murdered 50,000 Americans with deadly drugs recently. And luckily, it won't even be too hard to track them down. They're even so bold as to publish their address. They're part of a gang that calls itself "Merck Pharmaceuticals" (cf. Congressional testimony by top FDA scientist Dr. David Graham).

6/12/2006
Basically, what happened to Lawrence and the rest of these kids was this: They were hanging around in the Taconic parking lot. A surprising number of them were selling pot to people. The merchants complained. The GB cops asked for outside help because, let's face it, with a staff of 12 guys, it's a little tough to go undercover in your own community. No one seemed surprised with freakin' 18 kids got busted for dealing. That's maybe 40 percent of ther regulars in the lot last summer.
Unfortunately, many of these kids were the kids of the merchants who complained in the first place. Oops. Hence the creation of CCAJ to stop this "horrible" prosecution. So. Everybody lawyered up. The kids with smart lawyers got deals. They're doing community service. Unfortunately, the kids with dumb lawyers didn't get deals. They went to trial. Some won, some lost.
There's no vendetta, folks. David Capeless could give a flying f*ck about these punks. If they wanted to cut a deal, he cut a deal. If not, see you in court. He has bigger fish to fry in Pittsfield, which has a major drug problem. Oh yeah, the CCAJ people went to his office and asked him if he was going to cut deals for their kids. He said no. Why? Because he doesn't cut deals in public, something no DA does, unless they're idiots. So these people went off on this ridiculous tangent.
I'm sure Judith Knight, the candidate opposing Capeless, is a nice person. But the CCAJ has cut her legs off. In Adams, and Cheshire and Lee and Pittsfield and Lenox and Dalton and Hinsdale, and, whether these people want to admit it or not, Great Barrington, drugs are a major issue. The CCAJ, no matter how they present it, will come out as "softer" on drugs than Capeless. It's an impossible position to defend in Berkshire County. They basically have ensured he'll be re-elected.

6/13/2006
This colloquy is an intriguing thing in and of itself. Been reading for months now, and besides the easy to spot ranting idiot, I find many reasoned voices, agreeing, disagreeing, but above all discussing. However, it is easy to spot those who get it, and those who don't. And that difference is not just that some commenters acknowledge that such a thing as responsible drug use can exist, and are able to differentiate that from socially destructive drug dealing in heroin, cocaine, and other more arguably dangerous substances.

The Taconic Parking lot wasn't a drug scene, plain and simple. Rather, it was a capsule of a social breakdown in Southern Berkshire county, political deference to the rich and powerful, and outrageous police ineptitude, incompetence, and nonfeasance.

This town allowed a huge group of kids to run rampant for all of the Summer of '02. This continued on through '03...as the police discouraged them from socializing on the benches and streets of Downtown GB. The dynamic of the lot full of kids was most decidedly not a dope smoking neo-Woodstock. It was their place to hang, and they seemed, well, a bit mean. Fighting, vulgar language, arrogant posturing were the problems. Never once did I notice any sign (or smell) of the kids smoking pot. Frankly, I wish they had... it might have calmed the vibe. They weren't overpriviledged, but were mobile...old enough to drive, too young (and not countryclub affluent enough) to have anywhere to go. With their thuglike baggie pants, or tramplike hooker clothing, not an appropriate decorative element on GB's Norman Rockwell/Country Gentrified revitalized main street. So the police, when not busy with intradepartmental scandal (a whole other story), were tasked to drive them off the benches, and away from the storefronts...and out of sight.

The ensuing congestion, not that much more threatening than any highschool's parking lot absent any adult supervision and restraint, was NOT a drug thing. It was teenagers being obnoxious, and progressivly more so, as the GB police simply failed to find the capability to so much a cruise through the lot on their regular patrols. But all the while, a more serious drug dealing problem WAS not only existing, but openly festering.

Let's not mince words. Richard Stanley is not a nice guy. But he is rich, powerful, connected...and a slumlord. And in his apartments facing that parking lot a heroin dealer plied his wares...openly, notoriously, and apparently immune to any law enforcement. Perhaps all kids look alike to you, and all drugs are the same to (fine, you haven't heard a word I said, then, go fire up a Marlboro, and have beer and a bump before you drive home).

You could see the procession of junkies parade down the atrium at 284 Main, past the Burrito stand, and creep up to their convenience mart of choice. There is a distinct difference in these individuals, and they weren't the ones who were out in the parking lot being loud. GB's heroin problem is a rock best left unturned, apparently.. After all, junkies are gonna just OD and go away, anyway.

Well, this is not Sociology 101, but to my experience, skateboards and heroin just don't go hand in hand. But, this smack dealing was happening on the property of a pillar of the GB Revival. Stanley is not a force to be meddled with, that is undeniable. Was it a political choice to let the junkie just run his natural course? It is not hard to imagine that a junkie will eventually put himself out of business, and just disappear...much easier than a public opening of the can of worms that was festering in the genteel slum that is one of the less attractive parts of the Stanley empire.

So don't do the hard job, maintain social decorum with retail policing of the parking lot... takes too many cops away from the evidence room and union negotiations. Don't embarrass a rich well connected property owner, Wait, I know, they're teenagers, let's go bust some of them, they're bound to have pot...little bastards are stoned all the time.

And amazingly, the dumb little twerps fell for it. Too naive to notice the 30 year old guy who hung with them was a bit "out of his element", Did they think that Springfield narc was just there to get some teenage tail?.Hell, I hear there is a even older slumlord in this town try who hits on the same talent in lieu of rent.

So, Capeless is an opportunistic and vengeful man. Probably a good prerequisite for his office in this schizophrenic community. And those Taconic kids weren't really "haves", and not really "have-nots". Nor were they the "merchants" children...they were the merchants employees children...and that is the telling difference. The Berkshire underclass is not quite as noticeably Appalachian in its poverty...trailer trash can live in a split level ranch in Lee.

So, this little incestuous Berkshire Village can't find a way to solve a social moment (I don't think the busts have anything to do with Taconic Parking Lot's current "calmness", I think the 18 yr olds have just grown into 21 yr olds...and found a world that was always out there).

Remember this is a great place to escape to... if you're able to afford that 2nd or 3rd home, and have a healthy 401K, and an hard place to escape from if you're young, and McDonald's is the only place you can find to work.

6/22/2006

Golly gee what a shock.

Police: Sawin caught with pound of 'shrooms
By Tony Dobrowolski, Berkshire Eagle Staff

Friday, June 23
PITTSFIELD � Kyle W. Sawin, whom the commonwealth twice failed to convict of selling marijuana to an undercover police officer in Great Barrington two years ago, was arrested by the Berkshire County Drug Task Force last night and charged with numerous drug distribution offenses.
Sawin, 19, of Lebanon Mountain Road, Hancock, was also found to be in possession of a bag containing just under one pound of pscilocybin mushrooms worth approximately $4,000, according to law enforcement authorities. It is the biggest single seizure of the hallucinogenic drug pscilocybin in the drug task force's 23-year history.

He has been charged with three counts of distribution of marijuana, one count of possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, one count of distribution of psilocybin mushrooms, one count of possession of psiolcybin with intent to distribute and one count of being a minor transporting alcoholic beverages.

He was arrested in Sheffield.

Sawin was released on $500 bail, pending his arraignment in Southern Berkshire District Court in Great Barrington on Monday.

Sawin is one of the 18 people that police arrested in 2004 following an investigation into drug activity at the Taconic Lumber Parking Lot in Great Barrington, and was the first of the defendants to go to trial in Berkshire Superior Court.

7/4/2006
Let's hope that District Attorney Capeless
gets justice when he comes before his maker.

Clare

8/8/2006
Ha, it's the first time he got caught. Let alone the overt act of they fact that he actually had to buy the stuff. A dope smoker is a dope smoker.

looooooosers.

8/28/2006
People need to see the tactics being used with the present District Attorney as a self serving political person who could truly care less about Berkshire County and help vote him out of office on September 19th

9/17/2006
I'm certainely glad that i don't live in such draconian country.

9/19/2006
perhaps the most absurd thing about this is the fact they're spending HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of dollars to prosecute and lock this kid up for 2 years for a misdemeanor amount of marijuana that would have never touched anyone in any negative sort of way.(ISNT THE WHOLE COUNTRY LEGALLY A DRUG-FREE ZONE, WHAT IS THIS BS???).