MEDIA SAVVY
WHO’S BEEN SAYING WHAT. .?
When policies fail it is incumbent on our leaders to look for new
ones. They show no signs of doing so – even as Latin America's
body politic is threatened by the tentacles of the narco gangs
who pay off politicians, judges, journalists and policemen – or
just kill them, so that they can better transport drugs to us.
Observer
editorial, 13 November
Former head of MI5 Eliza Manningham-Buller today joins an
increasingly long list of ‘formers’ and ‘exes’ who have publicly
condemned the so-called ‘war on drugs’ as a ‘dead end’… a
former President (Switzerland’s Ruth Dreifuss), a former chief of
the US Federal Reserve (Paul Volker) and a former Chancellor of
the Exchequer (Nigel Lawson). They will be among many other
retired establishment figures lining up to say that we need to
launch a global and national search operation for a workable
alternative to prohibition. The question that leaps out, of
course, is why didn’t any of these people make their argument
before they retired from the day job?
Mark Easton,
bbc.co.uk
, 17 November
What’s sad, but predictable in the current political environment,
is the way the Obama White House has felt obliged to ignore its
previously semi-enlightened position on drugs, of seeing abuse
much more as a medical than law-enforcement issue. Now,
Obama is just another in the long line of presidents prosecuting
the cynical and counterproductive ‘war on drugs’. Who profits
from this insane war? The Mexican cartels, among many others.
Dan Gillmore,
The Guardian,
8 November
For the umpteenth time, there is no war on drugs in the UK. On
the contrary, what there is instead is a refusal to enforce the law
against drug use in a coherent, consistent, and effective
manner… The campaign to undermine the UN drug laws is
being promoted by some very bad people indeed and a large
number of useful idiots.
Melanie Phillips,
Daily Mail
, 19 November
Parents and teachers who want to stop children taking illegal
drugs get little help from the government. The feeble website
‘Talk to Frank’ (which we pay for through our taxes) more or less
assumes that drug taking is normal, with lots of matey, slang-
infested chat.
Peter Hitchens,
Mail on Sunday
, 6 November
They have no fear of police, authority or any consequences,
have unprotected sex and get blind drunk underage, that’s if
they aren’t already stoned on drugs.‘They’ are our children and
in a truly harrowing survey the low level of esteem to which
they have sunk has been laid bare. Half of adults in this country
think children of school age have started to behave like animals
and virtually the same number believe the problem is that they
are angry, violent and abusive. Additional findings show nearly
half of us reckon the situation is even worse and youths are
actually becoming feral.
Nick Ferrari,
Sunday Express
, 6 November
Reader’s question:
I am the manager at a needle exchange and have recently seen an
increase in clients being arrested and prosecuted very close to the
service, either on their way into or out of the exchange. It seems the
police see our clients as an easy target as they know there is a high
probability that they will have drugs on them. Clients are worried
about coming to the service because of this – what can we do?
Kirstie says:
What the police are doing is not right
, and is in contradiction with guidance issued by
the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in relation to the arrest and prosecution of people
in relation to drugs offences.
CPS guidance recognises that needle exchanges need police cooperation to carry out
the important work they do and to reduce the transmission of HIV, hepatitis C and other
infections. It specifically states that prosecutions of people who use drugs who are
found to be in possession of used needles (on the way to a needle exchange) or sterile
needles will not normally be in the public interest. This means that the prevention of
spreading serious disease will outweigh the need for a person to be prosecuted.
In relation to the arrest of people for possession of drugs in the vicinity of drugs
services, advice is clearly given that the prosecution of people for simple possession of
drugs based on information gathered near a needle exchange is also not in the public
interest. However, more serious offences are likely to result in arrest and prosecution.
Many services avoid situations
like the one you are experiencing by maintaining a good
relationship with the local police. I recommend setting up a meeting with the local chief
constable, with a view to coming to an arrangement about how clients are treated. This
would be an opportunity to put forward your views, and more importantly those of the
clients, about how the current situation negatively affects the service’s ability to operate
effectively. It might be possible to agree an exclusion zone around the needle exchange
in which clients cannot be policed.
If the police are not willing to negotiate with you, or a satisfactory agreement cannot
be reached, I suggest that a complaint be made to the Inspector at the local police
station or to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (www.ipcc.gov.uk). The
service could do this on behalf of the clients or those affected could complain
individually with your support. Reference should be made to the CPS guidance and how
this is not being followed in the specific cases which you are complaining about.
In the meantime please ensure your clients are aware of their rights in relation to
stop and search and to have legal advice and representation at the police station.
Email your legal questions to claire@cjwellings.com.
We will pass them to Kirstie to answer in a future issue of DDN.
For more information on the issues covered here please contact
the Release helpline on 0845 4500 215.
December 2011 |
drinkanddrugsnews
| 7
www.drinkanddrugsnews.com
Media Savvy |
Legal
LEGAL LINE
CAN WE STOP POLICE FROM
TARGETING OUR CLIENTS?
Release solicitor
Kirstie Douse
answers your legal questions
in her regular column