Civil Asset Forfeiture...

Another interesting concept poorly implemented.
 
Let me piggyback on this with eminent domain. They pay you something, but a fraction of what it is worth unless you know the right lawyer to sue the snot out of them.

If you think your state government has your interests at heart, they don't.
 
Last edited:
AMENDMENT V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Due process means that if you think I owe you anything over twenty dollars, take me to court. I get a jury, compulsory process to secure evidence and testimony in my favor. You get the burden of proof.

This is not rocket science. If you ain't getting it, it's because you choose to pretend that you don't get it. Nobody could really be that stupid. Oh, and you ain't fooling anyone either.
 
sr30 said:
Go on...
Click to expand...

Well, as I understand it, the intent was to create a clear path to disposition of property legally seized as evidence and subsequently unclaimed. The police legally raid a house, they find $20mm. Nobody has a resonable claim on the money, and nobody ever will.

It has morphed into something much different where the police take someone’s property simply because they believe it to be the product of criminal activity. This is of course a problem.
 
fieldgrade said:
Let me piggyback on this with eminent domain. They pay you something, but a fraction of what it is worth unless you know the right lawyer to sue the snot out of them.

If you think your state government has your interests at heart, they don't.
Click to expand...
Condemnation is based on an independent appraisal of the property to be condemned. Then another appraisal is done to verify the accuracy of the first one. That fraction is actually fair market value, based on recent sales of nearby comparable property.... just like the appraisal done when you sell your home.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
 
Howland said:
AMENDMENT V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Due process means that if you think I owe you anything over twenty dollars, take me to court. I get a jury, compulsory process to secure evidence and testimony in my favor. You get the burden of proof.

This is not rocket science. If you ain't getting it, it's because you choose to pretend that you don't get it. Nobody could really be that stupid. Oh, and you ain't fooling anyone either.
Click to expand...

I’ve been engaged in an argument over DP all day w some bootlickers over the Iredell county sheriffs purchase of an armored vehicle, no doubt w CAF proceeds...

Two fools, those who in fact raised their right hand and swore an oath, don’t seem to care about DP.

Shameful, willful ignorance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
doose said:
Condemnation is based on an independent appraisal of the property to be condemned. Then another appraisal is done to verify the accuracy of the first one. That fraction is actually fair market value, based on recent sales of nearby comparable property.... just like the appraisal done when you sell your home.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No sir. Not in NC. We ultimately sued in front of a jury to get full value. First offer was 1/3 of the final settled amount, and we knew what that amount was going to be long before the court date because... appraisals.
 
Last edited:
@JimB has a point, but so do y'all.

As I understood the intent way beack when, the idea was that assests gained through illegal activity were basically ill-gotten gains and could justifiably be seized and used for legitimate purposes. Question 1, of course, is who decides "legitimate." Question 2 is the growth of hyper-regulation the resultant increase in "illegal" activities...

Once the War on Drugs ramped up, asset forfeiture was even more egregiously abused, and eventually morphed into today's "Yeah? Well I say your cash looks suspicious, so I'm taking it for The State. Good luck getting it back!" Further, many law-enforcement agencies are allowed to keep some or all of the seized assets for their departmental use. A dark nuance to this is the self-financing police force, one that can expand its budget w/o going through the usual budgetary processes, justifying expenditures, or enduring oversight (however cumbersome, inept, or political those may be).

Maybe there's a case or two currently where a seizure is justified, I dunno. But I'd warrant that most all of it now is government sanctioned theft.
 
JimB said:
Well, as I understand it, the intent was to create a clear path to disposition of property legally seized as evidence and subsequently unclaimed. The police legally raid a house, they find $20mm. Nobody has a resonable claim on the money, and nobody ever will.
Click to expand...

This happens ALL the time. They pull someone over for speeding then smell pot. Search the car find 10k in duffle bag with 8lbs of pot. Who's duffel bag? Not mine ok tell the owner to come claim it.
 
fieldgrade said:
No sir. Not in NC. We ultimately sued in front of a jury to get full value. First offer was 1/3 of the final settled amount, and we knew what that amount was going to be long before the court date because... appraisals.
Click to expand...
I defer to you on knowing NC law. My explaination was for SC and specifically regardind easements for utilities. No actual confiscation of land, just rights to ingress, egress, and maintenance.

Sent from my SM-T820 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
doose said:
I defer to you on knowing NC law. My explaination was for SC and specifically regardind easements for utilities. No actual confiscation of land, just rights to ingress, egress, and maintenance.
Click to expand...

Thanks. And it's a moving target. It was all going to be mediated. Then we got a new head of DOT and he said we can take it or leave it. Off to court we went.
 
Windini said:
Maybe there's a case or two currently where a seizure is justified, I dunno. But I'd warrant that most all of it now is government sanctioned theft.
Click to expand...
I think the immediate issue is the lack of accountability and oversight. If the number of these situations is really that significant, then litigation against the state should force resolution. Has anyone sued yet?
 
Cowboy said:
This happens ALL the time. They pull someone over for speeding then smell pot. Search the car find 10k in duffle bag with 8lbs of pot. Who's duffel bag? Not mine ok tell the owner to come claim it.
Click to expand...
I'm more concerned about the 10K in cash without any 'illegal' items in said vehicle. That's the crux of Civil Asset Forfeiture laws......the cash itself is 'suspect'. Bullshit. It's highway robbery, plain and simple.

 
Last edited:
fieldgrade said:
Let me piggyback on this with eminent domain. They pay you something, but a fraction of what it is worth unless you know the right lawyer to sue the snot out of them.

If you think your state government has your interests at heart, they don't.
Click to expand...

Years ago I talked with a man whose dad had a farm in Chatham County when they were building Jordan Lake. He said they told his dad they needed the land, dad said no. They said we'll give you $, he said no. Then they claimed eminent domain and wrote him a check for half of what they originally offered, gave him a month to vacate.
 
Chuckman said:
Years ago I talked with a man whose dad had a farm in Chatham County when they were building Jordan Lake. He said they told his dad they needed the land, dad said no. They said we'll give you $, he said no. Then they claimed eminent domain and wrote him a check for half of what they originally offered, gave him a month to vacate.
Click to expand...

That lake would have been drained quickly with some dynamite assistance shortly after that dam was completed. Either that or full of snakehead fish, and used motor oil every weekend at every boat landing.
 
Saw this article this morning and thought about this thread.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...-people/ar-BBT2wKd?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=spartandhp

Our examination was aimed at understanding this little-discussed, potentially life-changing power that state law holds over citizens — the ability of officers to seize property from people, even if they aren't charged with a crime.
Click to expand...

This yielded a clear picture of what is happening: Police are systematically seizing cash and property — many times from people who aren’t guilty of a crime — netting millions of dollars each year. South Carolina law enforcement profits from this policing tactic: The bulk of the money ends up in its possession.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
JimB said:
Another interesting concept poorly implemented.
Click to expand...
It was implemented exactly as planned. Anyone who didn't think Law Enforcement at every level would not see this as a way to "legally" steal from the peasants believes in unicorns and Bernie Sanders.
Some elected officials are using the same rationale for civil asset forfeiture to ban all denominations larger than $10 bills.
 
JohnnyTyler said:
Saw this article this morning and thought about this thread.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/s...-people/ar-BBT2wKd?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=spartandhp
Click to expand...
Yup. Often times they keep the amount taken below the cost of a lawyer to file a suit to get the stolen property back.
Some PD have an unwritten policy of confiscating all the cash anyone they pull over has on them as "potential illegal drug money." They get away with this because the forfeiture laws were deliberately written in a manner that any amount of cash can be so declared.
 
Since 2015, the value of the property seized by police under civil asset forfeiture law has exceeded the value of the property stolen by those doing the taking without a badge (what the cops call “the real criminals”).

It’s policing for profit. When you can take just because of your magic suit and tin badge, and use it to by fancy toys (Dodge Charger Hellcat, weight sets for the department gym, etc), your motivation is to go get that bread.....not justice, not protecting the community, not doing actual investigatory work.

And amazingly enough, civil asset forfeiture gets worse when the economy is bad than it does when the economy is good.

It is the police committing armed robbery of the very public they claim to serve (and demand to thank them for their service).
 
Last edited:
fishgutzy said:
It was implemented exactly as planned.
Click to expand...
you're just cynical.

fishgutzy said:
Some PD have an unwritten policy of confiscating all the cash anyone they pull over has on them as "potential illegal drug money."
Click to expand...
have anyway to support this statement?

SPM said:
Since 2015, the value of the property seized by police under civil asset forfeiture law has exceeded the value of the property stolen by those doing the taking without a badge (what the cops call “the real criminals”).
Click to expand...
any support for this?

I'm sure that there is abuse, but while there is anecdotal evidence of this abuse I haven't seen evidence that it is as widespread as some of you think. I've been pulled over maybe once a year for the past 5 years, in most cases I was carrying cash, in no case was I asked about it much less had it taken. That said, I'd like some actual oversight of this infringement as well as a cheap path to recover any claimed property.
 
JimB said:
you're just cynical.


have anyway to support this statement?


any support for this?

I'm sure that there is abuse, but while there is anecdotal evidence of this abuse I haven't seen evidence that it is as widespread as some of you think. I've been pulled over maybe once a year for the past 5 years, in most cases I was carrying cash, in no case was I asked about it much less had it taken. That said, I'd like some actual oversight of this infringement as well as a cheap path to recover any claimed property.
Click to expand...
There have been numerous articles.
I'l see if I can find something.
One I recall was a small town in the southwest I believe where the police regularly stopped out of state vehicles and took all their cash and told them to sue if they wanted it back.

Here is just one.
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/2015/11/13/iowas-forfeiture-king/75726170/


Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SPM
I used to work for a pharmacy that offered home delivery. I was delivering to some homes in a well known drug area (not my fault, I can't pick the customers). Got pulled, had on a pharmacy uniform driving a company car. Got searched, accused of stealing drugs from patients and selling them on the black market, and they actually took my work money that I used to make change with for the patients who wished to pay in cash.
My boss had to fight the New Bern PD over it but I think he eventually got it straightened out.
Craziest thing I ever saw. If I had been in my own car outside business hours I could understand.
 
JimB said:
you're just cynical.


have anyway to support this statement?


any support for this?

I'm sure that there is abuse, but while there is anecdotal evidence of this abuse I haven't seen evidence that it is as widespread as some of you think. I've been pulled over maybe once a year for the past 5 years, in most cases I was carrying cash, in no case was I asked about it much less had it taken. That said, I'd like some actual oversight of this infringement as well as a cheap path to recover any claimed property.
Click to expand...

I was wrong.

It's been since 2014....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...urglars-did-last-year/?utm_term=.fafb248c4077
 
SPM said:
I was wrong.

It's been since 2014....

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...urglars-did-last-year/?utm_term=.fafb248c4077
Click to expand...
Nope, article says that civil forfeiture was far less than total thefts in 2014, even though 2014 included $1.7B from Bernie Maddof.

The article says that the numbers include only federal forfeitures, but that the state and local amounts are much smaller.

The article also says that the numbers are overstated because the gross amount includes amounts which are not retained by law enforcement, and that those amounts are significant.

I agree that the numbers seem big, but that doesn’t mean that there is widespread abuse, perhaps it’s just a function of the war on drugs.
 
sr30 said:
Still don’t understand how ANYONE can support this blatant violation of DUE PROCESS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Reminds me of one time listening to the now ousted BJ Barnes of Guilfird Co bragging about how the sheriff’s department has a decked out RV “command post” and their own airplanes and how it didn’t cost the tax payers one dime.
 
"What is the incentive to go out and make a special effort?” Bruder said. “What is the incentive for interdiction?”

That's a quote coming out of South Carolina, which seized $17,000,000 in assets in 2018.

Think of the implications of that statement.

Not the incentive of protecting the Public.

Not the incentive of serving the Public.

Not the incentive of "getting dangerous drugs off our streets."

Not the incentive of being the good guy against the evil in the world.

But the incentive of profit. Of getting their cut.

Another way of saying it is it's not worth their effort if they aren't gettin' that bread (which means they don't see it as a moral issue or a matter of justice, but a business).

Like I said it's nothing more than policing for profit.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/st...y-funds-essential-law-enforcement/2746412002/
 
Last edited:
So here is a question and some of the LEO here may have some insight.

A drug dealer is busted and he has $500 in cash on him and lets say $1,000 worth of weed. Do they tally that up as $1,500 seized?
If a buglar is caught and he has $10,000 worth of stolen goods in his evil secret lair that they cannot trace, is that $10,000 seized?
If a druggie is busted carrying $100 worth of meth, is that considered $100 seized?

I ask because if so, then 17 million is insanely low considering how much drugs/theft takes place.
 
What was wrong with that article (keep in mind I do not agree with these forfeiture laws at all unless there is an arrest and you get it back the minute you are cleared), they start with a sob story and then go on to say that blacks are unfairly targeted. Unfortunately the crime rate among blacks as a percentage of the population explains why they are targeted. So the article is bogus on that front.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom