The prosecution of various Indian store owners swept up by Operation Meth Merchant has run into some problems. For one thing, they’re having a hard time demonstrating intent on the part of the store owners:
… 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.
In some cases, the language barriers seem obvious – one videotape shows cold medicine stacked next to a sign saying, “Cheek your change before you leave a counter.” Investigators footnoted court papers to explain that the clue the informants dropped most often – that they were doing “a cook” – is a “common term” meth makers use. Lawyers argue that if the courts could not be expected to understand what this meant, neither could immigrants with a limited grasp of English.
“This is not even slang language like ‘gonna,’ ‘wanna,’ ” said Malvika Patel, who spent three days in jail before being cleared this month. ” ‘Cook’ is very clear; it means food.” And in this context, she said, some of the items the government wants stores to monitor would not set off any alarms. “When I do barbecue, I have four families. I never have enough aluminum foil.” [NYT]
Honestly, even having grown up in the US and knowing something about drug culture, I don’t know whether I would have caught the word “Cook” as drug slang in this context. The deeper root of the problem here, however, is that it’s very hard to write an effective law that says that something is legal unless it’s meant to be used to nefarious purposes. Sudafed, matches, camping fuel are either legal or illegal. You shouldn’t foist the burden on a convenience store owner to figure out how such common items will be used.
Another problem was that the prosecutors kept mixing up the different (unrelated) Patels involved:
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. [NYT]
Having been stereotyped by the prosecution, the store owners are hoping to use stereotypes in their defense. They’re deploying using the famous Peter Sellers’ legal defense: Drugs? Ve don’t have drugs in India:
For the Indians, their lives largely limited to store and home, it is as if they have fallen through a looking glass into a world they were content to keep on the other side of the cash register.“This is the first time I heard this – I don’t know how to pronounce – this meta-meta something,” said Hajira Ahmed, whose husband is in jail pending charges that he sold cold medicine and antifreeze at their convenience store on a winding road near the Tennessee border.
“We are from so much cleaner society where we are from in India,” he said. “We didn’t even know what drugs were.”
Ms. Patel says she has tried to shield herself from the ugly aspects of life here – she does not read newspapers because she wearies of all the crime. Maybe, she said, that was a mistake. “I think you need all this bad knowledge now if you want to live here.” [NYT]
Earlier posts on this subject: Operation Meth Merchant
The deeper root of the problem here, however, is that itÂ’s very hard to write an effective law that says that something is legal unless itÂ’s meant to be used to nefarious purposes. Sudafed, matches, camping fuel are either legal or illegal. You shouldnÂ’t foist the burden on a convenience store owner to figure out how such common items will be used.
This is a particularly interesting line of thought given articles like this CNN one about the possible common ingredients used in the London bombings.
“Cheek your change before you leave a counter.”
It’s the Indian way to drop acid. The nickel tang helps it sink into the mucous-membranes faster. Aunties helpfully grip your chin to get it flowing into your jaw-veins.
It just sounds boneheaded to me. Factor in the cost of the sting + the arrests + prosecutor’s time + risk for lawsuits… then you factor in possibility that even shopkeepers who knowingly sold drug related paraphernalia may get acquitted… then you factor in the possibiity that the druggies can go to a Walmart or Shopko or whatever to get what they need… this doesnt make sense. Well… maybe there is more to it. Is there a mayor or DA or police commissioner coming up for election? Sounds like some “I’m tough on crime” electioneering. Can these shopkeepers vote? From the sound of it, probably not.
“Doing up a cook” — hadn’t heard that one either.
Stil, probably not all of the people involved are this obviously innocent. This guy, for instance, seems questionable:
I’m not sure what the courts would say to this. On the one hand, the clerk is making a good faith effort to dissuade the buyer here, and following the general procedure indicated by the police. On the other, well…
It looks like the “Patel’s” lawyers are competent at handling the media — this is very favorable coverage. Are they going to be as good in the courtroom?
“We are from so much cleaner society where we are from in India,” he said. “We didn’t even know what drugs were.”
I have exclusive photos of Hajira tripped out on bhang lassis in his village during Holi.
that’s different, that’s prasad 😉
Amardeep, that same paragraph sounded like the opposite situation to me– sounded like the 55-year-old uncle had limited English proficiency. When he said “Yah, public misuse,” it sounded like he didn’t understand what the informant had just said and just repeated himself. Sort of like:
Hipster chick: “How much for those shoes?”
Chinatown merchant: “Ten dollar.”
Hipster: “But will that work with my artfully ripped jeans and T-shirt with a picture of Bruce Lee and writing in Bengali which I can’t read? ‘Cause gosh, I’m so darn ironic.”
Chinatown merchant: “Yah, ten dollar.”
After all,
What can you get for ten dollar?
Anything you want.
But it’s hard to say without more context.
The rich and innocent american kids must be saved from these filthy foreigners who sell them drugs. This “war” must be won.
You do realize that most people who are using meth aren’t “rich”.
I HOPE you DO understand that “rich” and “poor” are relative terms.
Sure I do. Relatively speaking, it isn’t the wealthy folk that are being ravaged by meth.
It gets attention when some all american type, upper middle class family gets affected by it. Until then it keeps its ugly head among the relatively poor.
More like filthy foreigners who sell people cough syrup, camping fuel and aluminum foil to innocent american kids.
The ‘war on Drugs’ isn’t going as planned:
The FDA blames foreign influences. The foreign influences blame Vestern influences. The Vestern influences ask the FDA to solve the problem.
“We are from so much cleaner society where we are from in India,” he said. “We didn’t even know what drugs were.”
Thanks Amit for commenting on that. I did a pit take when I read it. Folks living under all sorts of illusions all over the world.