blackascoal
The Force is With Me
'Trial proceedings' .. and you think that makes it better?
Any idea about what the history is in such proceedings?
Seizures of cash and property to increase under Trump
- Thread starter Nomad
- Start date
'Trial proceedings' .. and you think that makes it better?
Any idea about what the history is in such proceedings?
You don't know what civil forfeitures are, do you?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Sure, Darla.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Post 38, duh.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
I suppose the history is that the bag guys lose their shit.
blackascoal
The Force is With Me
This Federal Program Lets Cops Seize Cash, Evade State Laws And Keep Over A Billion Dollars
excerpt
Since 9/11, without warrants and despite a lack of criminal charges, law enforcement nationwide has taken in $2.5 billion from 61,998 cash seizures under equitable sharing. This federal civil forfeiture program lets local and state law enforcement literally make a federal case out of a seizure, if they collaborate with a federal agency. Not only can they then bypass state forfeiture laws, they can pocket up to 80 percent of the proceeds. So of that $2.5 billion seized through equitable sharing, local and state authorities kept $1.7 billion for their own uses.
In order to seize cash, police typically pulled drivers over for minor traffic infractions. During the stop, police would look for “indicators” of suspicious, criminal activity. Tinted windows, air fresheners, trash in the car, “a profusion of energy drinks,” “a driver who is too talkative or too quiet” and signs of nervousness have all been considered indicators. For one Florida sheriff, “cars obeying the speed limit were suspect—their desire to avoid being stopped made them stand out.”
On the grounds that a driver is sufficiently suspicious, police then have the authority to search the car with a drug dog. If the dog alerts (and there are significant concerns about their accuracy), police then have probable cause to seize property owned by the driver. After police seized cash, the government usually wins: The Washington Post found that out of nearly 62,000 cash seizures since 9/11, in only 4,455 cases—seven percent—did the government agree to return at least a portion of the money taken.
After he hired an attorney, the government offered to settle his case. But Costello would only get half of his money back. With his legal fees topping $9,000, Costello kept just $7,000—less than a quarter of what was originally seized. “Why would [they] give anything back if they thought you were guilty?” he told The Washington Post.
Across the country, 298 departments and 210 task forces, ranging from tiny Estelline, Tex. to Philadelphia, have seized the equivalent of at least 20 percent of their budgets. Police departments have become “dependent, if not addicted to that revenue stream,” noted Norm Stamper, former Seattle Chief of Police and now an advisory board member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “It’s when that revenue becomes a line item in next year’s budget that you’re dealing with I think a corrupt practice,” he added.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/instit...-cash-seizures-civil-forfeiture/#63399f6a561b
Trial proceedings are supposed to make robbery feel better?
excerpt
Since 9/11, without warrants and despite a lack of criminal charges, law enforcement nationwide has taken in $2.5 billion from 61,998 cash seizures under equitable sharing. This federal civil forfeiture program lets local and state law enforcement literally make a federal case out of a seizure, if they collaborate with a federal agency. Not only can they then bypass state forfeiture laws, they can pocket up to 80 percent of the proceeds. So of that $2.5 billion seized through equitable sharing, local and state authorities kept $1.7 billion for their own uses.
In order to seize cash, police typically pulled drivers over for minor traffic infractions. During the stop, police would look for “indicators” of suspicious, criminal activity. Tinted windows, air fresheners, trash in the car, “a profusion of energy drinks,” “a driver who is too talkative or too quiet” and signs of nervousness have all been considered indicators. For one Florida sheriff, “cars obeying the speed limit were suspect—their desire to avoid being stopped made them stand out.”
On the grounds that a driver is sufficiently suspicious, police then have the authority to search the car with a drug dog. If the dog alerts (and there are significant concerns about their accuracy), police then have probable cause to seize property owned by the driver. After police seized cash, the government usually wins: The Washington Post found that out of nearly 62,000 cash seizures since 9/11, in only 4,455 cases—seven percent—did the government agree to return at least a portion of the money taken.
After he hired an attorney, the government offered to settle his case. But Costello would only get half of his money back. With his legal fees topping $9,000, Costello kept just $7,000—less than a quarter of what was originally seized. “Why would [they] give anything back if they thought you were guilty?” he told The Washington Post.
Across the country, 298 departments and 210 task forces, ranging from tiny Estelline, Tex. to Philadelphia, have seized the equivalent of at least 20 percent of their budgets. Police departments have become “dependent, if not addicted to that revenue stream,” noted Norm Stamper, former Seattle Chief of Police and now an advisory board member of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. “It’s when that revenue becomes a line item in next year’s budget that you’re dealing with I think a corrupt practice,” he added.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/instit...-cash-seizures-civil-forfeiture/#63399f6a561b
Trial proceedings are supposed to make robbery feel better?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
no, what you are doing is exercising your right to ignorance. to you, and now sessions, you're a criminal as soon as you're under suspicion and that's all that matters to you. what you refuse to deal with is the aftermath of it all, such that a person is never charged (how can one be a criminal that's never convicted?) or one that's acquitted? how would have sessions deal with that?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
let me guess, you're perfectly fine with these 'definitions'?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
the history also has innocents losing their shit, but you're ok with those losers losing their shit because the bad guys are also losing theirs?
Not your simpleton's cut-and-paste, moron. Real world application.
Great question. Do you have any data on that?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Um, no, the definitions clearly discuss judicial procedures to make findings of criminality...
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
That would be the fault of the judicial system, not the prosecutor...
SmarterthanYou
rebel
i'll do a search on it, but understand that alot of innocents don't even attempt it because it costs more for the lawyer than it does the amount of cash or property they took, so it's not going to be accurate. is that ok with you or do you demand government certified proof?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
and you're aware that the government always considers itself in the 'right' when it comes to branding a person a criminal???? or is this one of those instances where you have no alternative but to believe papa government like the statist you wish you weren't?
SmarterthanYou
rebel
wrong. those are LAWS written up by the legislature about the money or property being the 'criminal'. and just FYI, that prosecutor is also part of the justice system, dimbulb.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
OK, Kenneth...
Life is Golden
The Sage
And the election butthurt continues.....
lol
lol