Congratulating those who read e-Book, ''True Story'' by Timothy Adams and co-written by Jeanniene Brown. My purpose for writing ''True Story'' was to shed light on my life sentence and the ''draconion crack cocaine laws'' and how it destroy's ones life.
Here are some inserts from Attoreny General Eric Holder's position on the crack cocaine laws:

Friday July 15, 2011

Only a year late, AG Holder sees light and reverses course on FSA pipeline sentencing issue.

Regular readers know that, since the Fair Sentencing Act became law in August 2010, lower courts have been divided over whether the defendants who committed crack offenses before the FSA was enacted but had not yet been initially sentenced should get the benenfit's of the FSA'S new mandatory minimum provisions. And, as I explained in this post way back in October 2010, I have been troubled and disappointed that the Justice Department had been arguing in these ''pipeline'' cases that defendants should continue to be sentenced under the old law repealed 100-1 crack/powder ratio if their crimes were committed before August 3, 2010.

I am now pleased to report than I need not be troubled or disappointed by DOJ's position on this issue anymore, because today Attorney General Eric Holder has come to see the statutory sentencing light and reversed course. In a two-page memo to all federal prosecutors dated July 15, 2011, AG Holder details his new view on this issue:

In light of the differing court decisions--and the serious impact on the criminal justice system of continuing to impose unfair penalties--I have reviewed our posiion regarding the applicability of the Fair Sentencing Act to cases sentenced on or afther the date of enactment. While I continue to believe that the Savings Statute, 1 U.S.C 109, precludes application of the new mandatory  minimums to those sentenced before the enactment of the Fair Sentencing Act, I agree with those courts that have held that Congress intended Act not only to ''restore fairness in federal cocaine sentencing policy'' but to do so as expeditiously as possible and to all defendants sentenced on or after the enactment date. As a result, I have concluded taht the law requires the application of the Act's new mandatory minimum sentencing provisions to all sentencing that occur on or after August 3, 2010, regardless of when the offense conduct took place. The law draws the line at August 3, however. The new provisions do not apply to sentences imposed prior to that date, whether or not they are final. Prosecutors are directed to act consistently with these legal principles.

Though I am pleased that AG Holder has now seen the light on this issue of statutory interpretation, I remain deeply disappointed that the Justice Department argued a contrary (and, in my view, deeply misguided) position in courts around the nation for nearly a year. Among the costs fo this mistake has been a large number of sentencings based on the old law that now will need to be redone, not to mention many litigation resources expended as defense counsel and judges have been force to grapple with DOJ's prior position. So while I celebrate DOJ now getting this right, I cannot help but express sadness that this reversal of course took so long.

Among the benefits of this change of position should be a quick end to lots of district and circuit (and possible SCOTUS) litigation over this pipeline issue. But, of course, the principal benefit to this new DOJ policy is that more defendants will now be able to benefit from the fairer sentencing terms that Congress created through this enactment of the FSA last year.

Some post of this FSA pipeline issue:
*Why is Obama's DOJ, after urging congress to ''completely eliminate'' any crack/powder disparity, now seeking to keep the 100-1 ratio in place as long as possible?
*Senators Leahy and Durbin write letter to Attorney General Holder urging application of FSA to pending cases
*Adding my two cents concerning application of the FSA pending cases
*A few more thoughts on applying the FSA to not-yet-sentenced defendants
*New USDC  opinion applying new FSA law to not-yet-sentenced defendants
*WSJ notes dispute over application of FSA to pending cases
*A (partial) account of deep split over application of FSA's new statutory terms to pipeline cases
*Seventh Circuit rejects FSA's application to defendants sentenced after it changed crack statutes
*Dissenting from denial of en banc review, Judge Williams make strongest case for applying FSA to pipeline cases
*First Circuit affirms Douglas, holding lower FSA crack minimums apply in pipeline cases
*Eleventh Circuit panel rules FSA's lower crack terms apply to defendants sentenced after enactment
*Eleventh Circuit panel re-issues (updated) opinion finding FSA lower crack mandatories apply all sentenced after FSA

We are looking for all feedback on ''True Story'' and Eric Holder

Thank You