[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 151 (2005), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3082-3083]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




    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.

[[Page 3083]]

  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.

                          ____________________