Dear San Francisco: "Sell Crack or Die" Isn't a Real Choice
Published September 28, 2009 @ 02:00PM PT

Dear San Francisco Superior Court Jury,
After hearing of your recent decision convicting an apparent trafficking victim of selling drugs at gunpoint, I felt compelled to write to you about the concept of control, since it is apparently a foreign concept to you. Should you care to look it up, the definition is here, but I can summarize by saying one person controls another when he has the power to direct or determine that other person's thoughts and/or actions. One example of full and coercive control you may have heard of is the institution of human trafficking, aka modern-day slavery. Since human trafficking has recently been the subject of a Lifetime mini-series, several feature films, and a New York Times series, I will assume that you have not been, in fact, living under rocks and have heard of it.
What you apparently don't understand, based on the explanations you gave of your recent decision that Rigoberto Valle is guilty of being a drug dealer and not a human trafficking victim, is how modern-day slavery works. In modern-day slavery, a trafficker uses force, fraud, or coercion to exploit someone's labor under violence or the threat of violence. Now I don't know if you've ever been forced to do something at gun-point or knife-point (as Mr. Valle described his interaction with his traffickers), but it greatly reduces your bargaining power. If your trafficker holds a gun to your head and says "pick tomatoes," you pick tomatoes over being shot. If he holds a knife to your chest and says "have sex with this man", you have sex over being stabbed. And if he threatens to shoot or stab you if you don't sell crack, well, then you sell crack.
What most trafficking victims don't have the power to do is tell the trafficker "I'm sorry, I'd prefer for you to enslave me in a legal industry, so if I get caught in a police sting, there won't be any confusion as to who was in the wrong." If they can do that, they probably can escape trafficking. So, when you say,
"To me, it came down to that he knew what he was doing was illegal. I don't think he honestly cared,"
I have to disagree. I think he cared a great deal not to be shot, arrested, or deported. I think he cared that he was being forced to do something dangerous and illegal in a country where he didn't understand the legal system. I think he cared not to put his family into further debt. Did he "choose" selling crack over death? Can that really be considered a choice?
I did not sit and listen to two lawyers hash this case out as you did, so perhaps this was not the miscarriage of justice it seems to be. Perhaps Mr. Valle was guilty of selling drugs of his own free will and wove a well-crafted lie about being a pawn in an international organized criminal syndicate to get out of going to jail. I can't say for sure that he's innocent. I can, however, say for sure that trafficking victims are enslaved every day in both legal and illegal industries. Some victims in illegal industries like prostitution and drug-selling are recognized by law enforcement for what they are: innocent people forced to do something against their will. But too often they are arrested as prostitutes or drug dealers or illegal immigrants and deported. The "sell crack or die defense" isn't just a defense -- it's a reality for some trafficking victims.
So, San Francisco Superior Court Jury, when you say you wanted to find Mr. Valle not guilty, I ask you to look deep inside and ask yourselves why you didn't. Was it really easier to believe him capable of inventing a story about evil traffickers forcing him to sell crack than to believe men were capable of enslaving him as a drug-dealer? Or was it easier to think that because he was a grown man, he should have been able to fight back? Was it easier to think that because he was an immigrant who had entered the country illegally, he could have committed other crimes as well? Thinking about human trafficking in a real and meaningful way is rarely easy. And neither are the lives of its victims, no matter what they are forced to do.
Photo credit: Marco Gomes
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
Beef Tacos and Forced Prostitution
-
Dreams of America Dashed: Mary's True Story of Slavery
-
In Recession, Fearful Workers Keep Quiet About Exploitation
Comments (6)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email



















End the war on drugs take the 100 billion a year saved and help people!!!!! simple ain't it unsless you own a for profit jail....
Posted by Cherokee Fred Jesus on 09/28/2009 @ 09:35PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Intresting article miss kloer and I agree with you that its time to stop punishing the innocent for what the guilty do.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/28/2009 @ 11:44PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Dear Ms. Kloar,
After reading your column, (or letter to the jury) I feel compelled to respond to you. I feel that one of us owes you an explanation. I was a member of the 12 person jury that convicted Rigoberto Valle. On behalf of myself and the 11 other jurors, I can assure you that our decision was not an easy one. In fact, many of us wanted nothing more than to find Mr. Valle NOT GUILTY. I (and many other jurors) found ourselves rooting for Valle and Razzaq the entire trial. We fought long and hard for the defense in the deliberation room. I truly wanted the facts and evidence to point to his innocence. But, the truth of the matter is it did just the opposite. He was clearly guilty of voluntarily selling crack cocaine on the streets of San Francisco. We based this on the testimony, facts, and evidence presented at trial. There were too many lies and too many holes uncovered. We could not look past this. I was the last juror to be convinced of his guilt and I promise you that I decided on my verdict with a very heavy heart. I feel incredible sympathy for Rigoberto and all that he has endured. I do not think he came to the U.S. intending to be a drug dealer. I believe he came here seeking a better a life for himself and his family back home. However, he got mixed with the wrong crowd and he made a terrible decision. He chose to sell drugs because it was fast and easy money. He could have worked harder doing something more legitimate and made less money. But, HE CHOSE to take on the risk (with the greater reward $) of selling crack cocaine. His decision backfired when he was approached by an undercover police officer. If I was not absolutely convinced of that, there is NO WAY I would have convicted him. I promise you, in my heart - I was praying for the evidence to point to his innocence. Like you said "I did not sit and listen to two lawyers hash this case out as you did, so perhaps this was not the miscarriage of justice it seems to be. Perhaps Mr. Valle was guilty of selling drugs of his own free will and wove a well-crafted lie about being a pawn in an international organized criminal syndicate to get out of going to jail." I can assure that this was the case. I agree that human trafficking is a huge problem in the U.S. and around the world. I agree that more and more victims are enslaved everyday and something needs to be done about it. I agree that in many cases it can be used as an excuse when somebody is forced to commit illegal acts. But, in the case against Rigoberto Valle - it was used as an attempt to get himself out of his own terrible mistake. Mr. Valle's story breaks my heart. He chose to do what he did to make a better life for his loved ones. But, the bottom line is that he was not forced to sell drugs. Our only job as a jury was to decide on that. This was not a cold and callous jury as you make us out to be. In fact, it was a group of 12 warm, empathetic individuals that made a decision based on the facts. We had no other choice but to find him Guilty and I hope you can understand that. Should you have any other questions about our verdict or the trial, please don't hesitate to ask. I'm happy to provide you with my insight.
Kind Regards,
David, Juror
Posted by David Kaufman on 09/29/2009 @ 10:29AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. kaufman...
If I may ask, what was it that had you and others on the jury cheering for him ?
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 09/29/2009 @ 05:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Mr. McHugh, That's a very good question. The jury had the opportunity to hear all of Mr. Valle's story. We learned about his family background and the unimaginable poverty he comes from. We learned about the nightmarish trip he endured just to get here. We learned that it cost his family's life savings to get across the border illegally. We understood why he came to the United States and we had tremendous sympathy for him. After learning what we learned about Rigoberto Valle - you'd have to be heartless to not root for him. We even understood why he chose to sell drugs - it was good money and he and his family desperately needed that money. But, our job as jurors was to decide if he was forced to sell drugs or if he chose to with his own free will. In this case, the facts proved that he chose to. It was extremely difficult for me to accept that, but it was evident. I wish he had chosen a different path to make money.
Posted by David Kaufman on 09/29/2009 @ 06:01PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thank you mr. kaufman.
Posted by Thomas McHugh on 10/04/2009 @ 07:34PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.