Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

[vt]

Cash and property taken from citizens NOT charged with a crime are fueling aggressive arms spending for police departments across the country.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/inv...nding/?hpid=z2

It's difficult to believe that police can take your assets like this. Here's further background:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...ou-should-know

[dcarrigg]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Have to be honest here - I don't see so much wrong with federal civil forfeiture laws. I've seen cities and states abuse them. Rudy Giuliani may have been the worst.

That said, I think Federal civil forfeiture's an important tool. It's far from perfect, but it has been one of the only ways they've been getting at FIRE in recent years. Check out the wiki list of notable cases. The FBI ain't pulling your uncle over and taking his truck over a joint here. This is the feds. The big money's coming from Barclays and Lloyds and Credit Suisse and it's a key tool in fighting white-collar crime.

Check out the ABA entry. Here's how it begins:

Asset forfeiture has ancient roots. At its inception it was used by governments to fight piracy. More recently, it has emerged as a powerful tactical weapon in the fight against organized crime and drug trafficking organizations. It is also an indispensible tool in federal white collar crime prosecutions. According to most recent statistics, half of all federal forfeiture cases involve white collar crime. This development is crucial to understanding the importance of asset forfeiture in contemporary criminal prosecutions. White collar crime, in its modern incarnation, affects vast numbers of victims who suffer large monetary losses. Without the recovery of funds made possible through the use of asset forfeiture, victims would be left to their own devices in recovering their losses.

That's right. Half of all Federal forfeiture cases involve white collar crime.

Meanwhile, if you're innocent or they don't indict within 60 days, you get the money back. It's written clearly into the law. Not only do they have to pay the money back, but they are required to pay legal fees if the seizure is wrongful, as well as incidental costs like travel fees, and interest payments for the period that property was seized.

Now, vt, ask yourself:

Who benefits from agitating the little people specifically against federal civil asset forfeiture in the press - a tool that is used in the majority instances to punish big-time white collar crime?

According to the DOJ stat report, for fiscal year 2012, DOJ did 1,807 federal civil forfeiture cases. They did 163,831 criminal cases by comparison. So what's the real issue here?

If you ask me, this is just more cheerleading to let the banks and ponzi schemers get away with murder consequence-free.

[lektrode]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Have to be honest here - I don't see so much wrong with federal civil forfeiture laws. I've seen cities and states abuse them..... So what's the real issue here?
...
....
If you ask me, this is just more cheerleading to let the banks and ponzi schemers get away with murder consequence-free.

+1

but OTOH, ya cant say this ISNT true:

Cash and property taken from citizens NOT charged with a crime are fueling aggressive arms spending for police departments across the country.

and whether or 'NOT charged with a crime' isnt the problem - THE PROBLEM is, IMHO:

the over zealous enforcement of the letter of the law - or worse: municipal 'ordinance' - in an effort to offset or 'pay for' the copshop ops, et al - (the really 'efficient' setups have their own kangaroo courts that cut a chunk back to the state, so the legislature is solidly behind the 'mission')

and the 'siezures' happen with every moving - or non-moving or non-motorized - 'violation' they can nail ya for!
and its not about 'justice' either - its about OPS BUDGETS

kind of like this: no money to fix/repair/repave the roads, but PLENTY MONEY TO REPAINT THE LINES?
and usually right over/thru the potholes, broken/crumbling pavement etc - and why DO they do THAT, anyway?

why: its because the LINES ON THE ROAD ARE REVENUE 'enhancements' (fergit about 'safety', that costs even more than 'maintenance' - unless of course there's some fed DOT funds 'available' - then ITS ALL ABOUT 'safety' and stuff like wheelchair ramps in places that not even 1-millionth of the public would EVER venture on a wheelchair)

to stuff like 'equipment violations' that affect - or 'risk' - NOBODY but the driver/owner of the vehicle (and then force ya to replace yer windshield cuz it has a little crack in one corner opposite the driver, thats bothered NOBODY for years, til some eagle-eyed quota-crusha happens to notice it)

not that i dont think the 'criminal class' shouldnt pay for the costs of 'keeping the streets safe' - but things are REALLY starting to get outa control (and methinks it has more to do with sloppin the beltway hog-trough than anything else)

[dcarrigg]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Yeah. Like I said, I've seen the states and locals mess it up big time. Depends on who's in charge there. It's weird how they weave that WaPost article - goes from decrying federal civil forfeiture to discussing 68,000+ cash seizures by locals after. I like to take the nuanced view on this one. Barney Fife doesn't need a crowd control tank and a dancing anti-drugs robot. But DOJ needs to be able to snatch big-time dirty cash before indicting, otherwise it disappears through an offshore shell rabbit hole never to be heard or seen from again.

Got to be a happy medium somewhere here.

[lektrode]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Yeah. Like I said, I've seen the states and locals mess it up big time. Depends on who's in charge there. It's weird how they weave that WaPost article -

maybe not so wierd....

goes from decrying federal civil forfeiture to discussing 68,000+ cash seizures by locals after. I like to take the nuanced view on this one. Barney Fife doesn't need a crowd control tank and a dancing anti-drugs robot. But DOJ needs to be able to snatch big-time dirty cash before indicting, otherwise it disappears through an offshore shell rabbit hole never to be heard or seen from again.

Got to be a happy medium somewhere here.

+1
esp on barney...
with the worst of them being the 'not quite a cop' type - nor trained like em - yet has the same 'power to sieze' (never mind carries)

[LorenS]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Yeah. Like I said, I've seen the states and locals mess it up big time. Depends on who's in charge there. It's weird how they weave that WaPost article - goes from decrying federal civil forfeiture to discussing 68,000+ cash seizures by locals after. I like to take the nuanced view on this one. Barney Fife doesn't need a crowd control tank and a dancing anti-drugs robot. But DOJ needs to be able to snatch big-time dirty cash before indicting, otherwise it disappears through an offshore shell rabbit hole never to be heard or seen from again.

Got to be a happy medium somewhere here.

Every time I see a story on massive fraud there is a wail and cry that they "can't find the money". If you can't transfer over $10,000 without a red flag going up how do people like Corzine and Madoff make off with multiple millions/billions and the feds can't find the money?

[thriftyandboringinohio]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

Every time I see a story on massive fraud there is a wail and cry that they "can't find the money". If you can't transfer over $10,000 without a red flag going up how do people like Corzine and Madoff make off with multiple millions/billions and the feds can't find the money?

That's a truly excellent question

[lektrode]

Re: Police Seize Assets Of Citizens NOT Charged With Crimes

That's a truly excellent question

+1
even tho it DOES have a truly most UNexcellent answer - involving all the usual suspects - with a now typical response
but of course, from '40000feet, nothing looks illegal'