Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cultural Differences Complicate a Georgia Drug Sting Operation
New York Times ^ | August 4, 2005 | KATE ZERNIKE

Posted on 08/03/2005 8:50:53 PM PDT by seacapn

ROME, Ga., July 29 - When they charged 49 convenience store clerks and owners in rural northwest Georgia with selling materials used to make methamphetamine, federal prosecutors declared that they had conclusive evidence. Hidden microphones and cameras, they said, had caught the workers acknowledging that the products would be used to make the drug.

But weeks of court motions have produced many questions. Forty-four of the defendants are Indian immigrants - 32, mostly unrelated, are named Patel - and many spoke little more than the kind of transactional English mocked in sitcoms.

So when a government informant told store clerks that he needed the cold medicine, matches and camping fuel to "finish up a cook," some of them said they figured he must have meant something about barbecue.

The case of Operation Meth Merchant illustrates another difficulty for law enforcement officials fighting methamphetamine, a highly addictive drug that can be made with ordinary grocery store items.

Many states, including Georgia, have recently enacted laws restricting the sale of common cold medicines like Sudafed, and nationwide, the police are telling merchants to be suspicious of sales of charcoal, coffee filters, aluminum foil and Kitty Litter. Walgreens agreed this week to pay $1.3 million for failing to monitor the sale of over-the-counter cold medicine that was bought by a methamphetamine dealer in Texas.

But the case here is also complicated by culture. Prosecutors have had to drop charges against one defendant they misidentified, presuming that the Indian woman inside the store must be the same Indian woman whose name appeared on the registration for a van parked outside, and lawyers have gathered evidence arguing that another defendant is the wrong Patel.

The biggest problem, defense lawyers say, is the language barrier between an immigrant store clerk and the undercover informants...

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Georgia
KEYWORDS: drugs; federalagents; georgia; methamphetamine; sudafed
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
Does anyone have more information on this case? Preferably from some other source than the NY Times? Because, it SOUNDS like yet another example of agents going for the low-hanging fruit then jackhammering out a case to fit the "evidence."

This part is especially disturbing:

"Prosecutors have had to drop charges against one defendant they misidentified, presuming that the Indian woman inside the store must be the same Indian woman whose name appeared on the registration for a van parked outside, and lawyers have gathered evidence arguing that another defendant is the wrong Patel."

1 posted on 08/03/2005 8:50:53 PM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: seacapn

Why would you want somebody who has difficulty with the language to represent you in a commercial enterprise?


2 posted on 08/03/2005 8:53:59 PM PDT by BipolarBob (Yes I backed over the vampire, but I swear I didn't see it in my rearview mirror.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob

How do you mean? I generally wouldn't, since they wouldn't be able to understand all the slang, code-words, and expressions that get used in whatever line of business it might be.


3 posted on 08/03/2005 8:55:25 PM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: seacapn
The biggest problem, defense lawyers say, is the language barrier between an immigrant store clerk and the undercover informants

If only American citizens had these built in excuses.

In the southwest, and many other areas, law enforcement routinely hears, "I no speak English".

4 posted on 08/03/2005 8:57:10 PM PDT by Black Tooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

Ignorance of the law is no excuse......unless you're an immigrant.


5 posted on 08/03/2005 8:59:09 PM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn
Forty-four of the defendants are Indian immigrants - 32, mostly unrelated, are named Patel - and many spoke little more than the kind of transactional English mocked in sitcoms.

I'll tell my grand kids about how I remember when most everyone in America spoke English, and all the store signs were in English too!

Of course, they won't believe me.

6 posted on 08/03/2005 8:59:15 PM PDT by Black Tooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Black Tooth

Right, which is why this case smells funny - it relies on an understanding of english slang and the way that people make homebrew meth.


7 posted on 08/03/2005 8:59:39 PM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: moehoward

But what exactly is the law? Is it illegal to sell someone four cold medicine packets and some aluminum foil over the course of two days? Is that a law, on the books?


8 posted on 08/03/2005 9:00:35 PM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BipolarBob
Why would you want somebody who has difficulty with the language to represent you in a commercial enterprise?

They are usually the owners of these convenience stores not just people hired to staff the store.

9 posted on 08/03/2005 9:01:13 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: moehoward
Ignorance of the law is no excuse......unless you're an immigrant.

Correct, that only applies to American citizens that speak English.

10 posted on 08/03/2005 9:02:09 PM PDT by Black Tooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: seacapn
So when a government informant told store clerks that he needed the cold medicine, matches and camping fuel to "finish up a cook,"

If I were a clerk and someone said that to me, I wouldn't have a clue what he was talking about.

Would that mean I committed a crime?

11 posted on 08/03/2005 9:02:35 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

Stupid anti-meth rules. At some places you can only buy two packages of pills with pseudoephedrine. So you can buy two (but don't you dare buy three) of the 12 pill packages, or buy two of the 100 pill bottles. 36 pills = bad meth maker, 200 pills = good citizen with the sniffles.


12 posted on 08/03/2005 9:03:16 PM PDT by KarlInOhio (Bork should have had Kennedy's USSC seat and Kelo v. New London would have gone the other way.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn
It's like those lame sting operations when the undercover agent would walk into the head shop and ask "how much is that hash pipe"? When they were sold as *wink* *wink* a novelty tobacco pipe.
13 posted on 08/03/2005 9:03:38 PM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

How is this not entrapment? And if the GBI agents didn't use the Sudafed to actually brew up any actual drugs, then how is what the store clerks did against the law? It's only illegal to sell Sudafed to people who actually use it to make illegal drugs.


14 posted on 08/03/2005 9:05:01 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

I have no idea, but that's the whole point. What about bulk item stores like Costco?


15 posted on 08/03/2005 9:05:17 PM PDT by moehoward
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: seacapn; BipolarBob; Black Tooth; moehoward; FreedomCalls; Graybeard58; KarlInOhio

"MARLBORO, MARLBORO, SMOKEY SMOKEY."

16 posted on 08/03/2005 9:11:17 PM PDT by Enterprise ("Islam is not a religion, but rather a means of world conquest" - ALAN BURKHART.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

This kind of thing frightens me. If I have a garage sale and sell off some extra rolls of foil, can I go to jail if someone tells me they're going to use it for a "cook-up?"


17 posted on 08/03/2005 9:13:01 PM PDT by seacapn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

If someone had said this to me, I would not know what the hell they're talking about. What genius thought of this entrapment scam?


18 posted on 08/03/2005 9:16:56 PM PDT by cyborg (Karma is a cruel taskmaster.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seacapn

http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1122023111925


19 posted on 08/03/2005 9:17:27 PM PDT by Hushpuppie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls
How is this not entrapment? And if the GBI agents didn't use the Sudafed to actually brew up any actual drugs, then how is what the store clerks did against the law? It's only illegal to sell Sudafed to people who actually use it to make illegal drugs.

While I somewhat agree with you, you might want to check out the thread about the judge who threw out a conviction against a guy who was acused of using the Internet to try to entice a child into sex. Since it was a sting operation and the supposed child was actually a law enforcement officer, the judge determined that no law had been broken because there was no real child involved.
20 posted on 08/03/2005 9:21:01 PM PDT by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson