The Congressional Record (House)
During Debate on HR 2460 WIRELESS TELEPHONE PROTECTION ACT
February 26, 1998
---
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition of H.R. 2460, The Wireless Telephone Protection Act. Setting aside the vital and relevant question of whether the enumerated powers and tenth amendment allow the federal government to make possession of electronic scanning devices criminal, another aspect of this bill should have met with harsh criticism from those who hold individual liberties in even some regard.
Under current `anti-cloning' law, prosecutors must prove a defendant intended to use scanning equipment illegally, or have an `intent' to defraud. This bill shifts the burden of proof of `innocent use' from the prosecutor to the defendant.
The United States Constitution prohibits this federal government from depriving a person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Pursuant to this constitutional provision, a criminal defendant is presumed to be innocent of the crime charged and, pursuant to what is often called `the Winship doctrine,' the persecution is allocated the burden of persuading the fact-finder of every fact necessary to constitute the crime . . . charged.' The prosecution must carry this burden because of the immense interests at stake in a criminal prosecution, namely that a conviction often results in the loss of liberty or life (in this case, a sentence of up to ten years).
This radical departure from the long held notion of `innocent until proven guilty' warrants opposition to this bill.