The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“INTRODUCTION OF THE WITNESS SECURITY AND PROTECTION ACT OF 2005” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H813-H815 on March 1, 2005.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
INTRODUCTION OF THE WITNESS SECURITY AND PROTECTION ACT OF 2005
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cummings) is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise on behalf of the countless communities across this Nation that live under a tyranny of fear due to witness intimidation.
Our criminal justice system relies on witnesses to provide essential evidence to law enforcement in the administration of justice. Unfortunately, drug dealers and other criminals employ brutal tactics to silence witnesses, including threats, vandalism, violence, and even murder.
When cases crumble due to witness intimidation, defendants that may be convicted for their crimes are free once again to violate the sanctity of our communities. A National Institute of Justice study concluded: ``Witness intimidation is a pervasive and insidious problem. No part of the country is spared and no witness can feel entirely free or safe.''
A number of prosecutors interviewed for this study ``suspect witness intimidation occurs in up to 75 to 100 percent of the violent crimes committed in some gang-dominated neighborhoods.''
With that said, we must acknowledge that witness intimidation is a menacing cancer in our society that, if left untreated, will continue to spread and intensify, undermining the very foundation of our criminal justice system.
{time} 1930
Mr. Speaker, witness intimidation is eroding public trust in the government's ability to protect witnesses and demoralizing needed community cooperation to enforce the law.
Around the country, from urban centers to the heartland, reporting crimes can be extremely dangerous and even deadly. On February 4 of this year, WGAL, Channel 8 reported a 10-year-old named Katie Collman was found dead in an Indiana creek. A suspect in her killing confessed he wanted to intimidate little Katie after she witnessed him producing or consuming methamphetamine.
In the city that I call my home, Baltimore City, our State's Attorney reports that at least 25 percent of the nonfatal shooting cases are dismissed due to witness intimidation issues and most murder cases are affected in one way or another. Since September 2004, five witnesses have been shot or murdered.
Mr. Speaker, perhaps nowhere is there an example more clear in illustrating the realities of witness intimidation than in the tragedy that claimed the lives of the Dawson family from my district in East Baltimore City.
In response to Mrs. Dawson's heroic efforts to report intense drug distribution activity in her neighborhood, the Dawson family home was firebombed in the middle of the night on October 16, 2002. This insidious act not only stole the lives of Mr. Dawson and Mrs. Dawson, but also those of their five young children.
Unfortunately, this was not the only serious incident of witness intimidation to surface in Baltimore City. Baltimore Police Detective Thomas Newman was murdered 2 years ago after his testimony in a trial concerning a shooting.
On December 2, 2004 a DVD produced by criminals entitled ``Stop the Snitching'' surfaced in Baltimore. It graphically illustrates the violent drug culture and the code of silence on the streets that can paralyze entire communities seeking to abide by the law.
``Stop the Snitching'' goes so far as to depict grotesque images of three bullet ridden bloody corpses accompanied by the phrase ``snitch prevention.''
On January 15, 2004, in the North Baltimore community of Harwood, Edna McAbier had her home firebombed in apparent retaliation for her work to purge her community of criminal activity.
I am sure many of my colleagues could recount many other such incidents in their districts.
Regrettably, these examples are representative of a growing problem of bold intimidation that send a clear message to the Nation that cannot be overstated. Those who would cooperate with police in the pursuit of justice face serious retaliation and possibly execution.
Witness protection programs provide an indispensable tool to law enforcement to combat crime and address witness intimidation. The Witness Security Program established in 1970 and administered by the Department of Justice has successfully carried out its charge to protect witnesses testifying in extremely serious Federal cases.
The United States Marshals Service has done an outstanding job of providing witnesses and their family who have been placed in their custody with long-term protection, relocation, new identities, housing, employment, medical treatment and funds to cover the most essential of needs.
In over 30 years, not a single witness has been harmed that followed security procedures while being actively protected by the United States Marshals Service. More to the point, cases involving the testimony of the WSP participants have an 89 percent conviction rate.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the countless communities across this nation that live under a tyranny of fear due to witness intimidation.
Our criminal justice system relies on witnesses to provide essential evidence to law enforcement in the administration of justice. Unfortunately, drug dealers and other criminals employ brutal tactics to silence witnesses, including threats, vandalism, violence, and even murder.
When cases crumble due to witness intimidation, defendants that may be convicted for their crimes are free once again to violate the sanctity of our communities.
A National Institute of Justice study concluded, ``Witness intimidation is a pervasive and insidious problem. No part of the country is spared and no witness can feel entirely free or safe.''
A number of prosecutors interviewed for this study ``suspect witness intimidation occurs in up to 75 percent to 100 percent of the violent crimes committed in some gang-dominated neighborhoods.''
With that said, we must acknowledge that witness intimidation is a menacing cancer in our society that, if left untreated, will continue to spread and intensify--undermining the very foundation of our criminal justice system.
Mr. Speaker, witness intimidation is eroding public trust in the government's ability to protect witnesses and demoralizing needed community cooperation to enforce the law.
Around the country, from urban centers to the heartland, reporting crimes can be extremely dangerous and even deadly. On February 4, 2005, WGAL Channel 8 reported, a 10-year-old girl named Katie Collman was found dead in an Indiana creek. A suspect in her killing confessed he wanted to intimidate Katie after she witnessed him producing or consuming methamphetamine.
In the city I call home, the State's Attorney for Baltimore City reports that ``at least 25 percent of non-fatal shooting cases are dismissed due to witness [intimidation] issues and most murder cases are affected on some level,'' and that, since September 2004, five witnesses have been shot or murdered.
Mr. Speaker, perhaps nowhere is there an example more clear in illustrating the realities of witness intimidation than in the tragedy that claimed the lives of the Dawson family from my district in East Baltimore City.
In response to Mrs. Dawson's heroic efforts to report intense drug distribution activity in her neighborhood, the Dawson family home was firebombed on October 16, 2002. This insidious act not only stole the lives of Mr. Dawson and Mrs. Dawson, but also those of their five young children.
Unfortunately, this was not the only serious incident of witness intimidation to surface in Baltimore City. Baltimore Police Detective Thomas Newman was murdered 2 years ago after his testimony in a trial concerning a shooting.
On December 2, 2004, a DVD produced by criminals entitled ``Stop Snitching'' surfaced in Baltimore. It graphically illustrates the violent drug culture and the code of silence on the streets that can paralyze entire communities seeking to abide by the law.
``Stop Snitching'' goes so far as to depict grotesque images of three bullet-ridden, bloody corpses accompanied by the phrase ``snitch prevention.''
On January 15, 2005, in the North Baltimore community of Harwood, Edna McAbier had her home firebombed in apparent retaliation for her work to purge her community of criminal activity.
I am sure many of my colleagues could recount many other such incidents in their districts.
Regrettably, these examples are representative of a growing problem of bold intimidation that send a clear message to the nation that cannot be overstated--those who would cooperate with police in the pursuit of justice face serious retaliation and possibly execution.
Witness protection programs provide an indispensable tool to law enforcement to combat crime and address witness intimidation. The Witness Security Program, WSP, established in 1970 and administered by the Department of Justice has successfully carried out its charge to protect witnesses testifying in extremely serious federal cases.
The United States Marshals Service, USMS, has done an outstanding job of providing witnesses and their families who have been placed in their custody with long-term protection, relocation, new identities, housing, employment, medical treatment, and funds to cover the most essential of needs.
In over 30 years, not a single witness has been harmed that followed security procedures while being actively protected by the USMS. More to the point, cases involving the testimony of the WSP participants have an 89 percent conviction rate.
In contrast, State witness protection programs are severely under-
funded and enjoy virtually no Federal support.
While non-federal witnesses can participate in the WSP under certain conditions, States are required to reimburse the Federal Government for the cost of providing such protection unless a waiver is granted.
As a result, State and local prosecutors often must choose between funding investigations or funding costly, but necessary witness protection programs. This often leads to some jurisdictions providing no witness protection at all.
No one wins when law enforcement officials are forced to make such choices.
That is why I introduced the Witness Security and Protection Act of 2005, H.R. 908. I am proud the esteemed senior Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, will be reintroducing a companion bill to this legislation in the Senate.
H.R. 908 would establish within the USMS a Short-Term State Witness Protection Program tailored to meet the needs of witnesses testifying in State and local trials involving homicide, a serious violent felony or a serious drug offense.
H.R. 908 would also authorize $90 million per year in competitive grants for the next 3 years. State and local district attorneys and the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, can use these funds to provide witness protection or pay the cost of enrolling their witnesses in the Short-Term State Witness Protection Program within the USMS.
Grants under this legislation would only be awarded to prosecutors in States with high homicide rates to ensure we target those most in need of Federal support.
Improving protection for State and local witnesses will move us one step closer toward alleviating the fears of and threats to prospective witnesses, and help to safeguard our communities from violence.
While we cannot bring back all those who carried a heavy burden of fear due to witness intimidation, we can honor their sacrifice by taking the necessary steps today to fight against that future intimidation.
I urge my colleagues to join me in taking that critical step by cosponsoring, H.R. 908, the Witness Security and Protection Act.
____________________
