Earlier this week, you may have read my post, "Border Patrol Agent Accused of Staging Fake Drug Bust to Help Traffickers Rip Off Cartel." The purpose of such a story isn't to shame the individual. Instead, we need to critique our policies because these kinds of results are
predictable. Corruption is one of the many costs associated with criminalizing vice. Of the 8,000 federal agents who were hired during the first eleven years of the prohibition of alcohol, sixteen-hundred of them were eventually fired (usually for corruption) with 257 agents being criminally prosecuted.[1] That was a foreseeable outcome as those agents had to resist the lure of obscene wealth while waging an unwinnable, unpopular war.
Roy Olmstead was a fast-rising lieutenant in the Seattle Police Department when he was arrested in 1920 for aiding an illegal shipment of Canadian liquor.[2] Olmstead was promptly fired from the police department and that led to his transition into the contraband business. By bribing several of the local officials and politicians, Olmstead built such a successful underground business that he was nicknamed the "King of the Northwest Bootleggers." As a matter of fact, he owned a radio station that was allegedly a front for his bootleg business in which coded references over the airwaves alerted members of his organization to the whereabouts of the coast guard.[3]
Believe it or not, but Roy Olmstead was a high-character individual. That sounds odd, right? Nevertheless, Olmstead guided his bootleg empire with the carrot, not the stick. Members of his organization were not allowed to carry guns even though the threat of rival gangs was always present. In fact, this man's temperament was so levelheaded that he actually shook the hand and congratulated the prosecutor after being sentenced to four years in prison.[4]
If only the drug cartels of today would demonstrate Roy Olmstead's sense of business ethics. Thousands of people died from bathtub gin during the Prohibition era because numerous bootleggers used cheap industrial alcohol. However, Roy Olmstead refused to endanger his clients with cheap substitutes.[5] For an apt comparison, think of the heroin dealers of today who often "cut" or dilute their product with cheaper, more dangerous drugs like fentanyl, which is roughly 50 times stronger than heroin. Fentanyl is responsible for an untold number of overdoses, including Prince's death.
Federal agents with the Bureau of Prohibition arrested Olmstead and 89 other defendants in 1924 in what was the largest criminal case in the state's history. However, the prosecution gained most of its evidence through wiretaps, which was a controversial tactic because those federal agents never obtained a search warrant. Furthermore, wiretapping was illegal at that time in the state of Washington. Even the hard-charging enforcer of Prohibition, Mabel Walker Willebrandt (Assistant Attorney General) labeled this wiretapping as "dangerous and unwarranted."[6] Olmstead and several of the other defendants argued that their 4th and 5th Amendment rights had been violated. Nonetheless, the federal judge dismissed those claims and allowed the evidence to stand.
Roy Olmstead appealed his conviction all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, Olmstead v United States. However, five out of nine judges upheld the decision. On the other hand, Justice Louis Brandeis dissented with the argument that the 4th Amendment protected individuals “right to be let alone.” This case, like so many others, demonstrates that our criminal justice system consistently sides with enforcing laws in opposition to protecting individuals' right to privacy.
There will be several more posts like this that highlight how vice laws are eroding our Constitutionally-protected rights.
 | |
| (Photo Sheila Scarborough-Flickr) |
[1] Steven B. Duke and Albert C. Gross. America's Longest War: Rethinking Our Tragic Crusade against Drugs. New York: Jeremy P. Tarcher / Putnam Book, 1993. Print. P 87
Thomas Reppetto. American Mafia: A History of Its Rise to Power. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 2004. Print. P 93
[2] Samuel Dash. The Intruders: Unreasonable Searches and Seizures from King John to John Ashcroft. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 2004. Print. P 73
[3] Thomas Reppetto. P 102
[4] Samuel Dash. P 75
[5] Norman H. Clark. The Dry Years: Prohibition and Social Change in Washington. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1965. Print. P 166
[6] Thomas Reppetto. P 102
No comments:
Post a Comment