Alabama Prosecutor, Sheriff Threaten to Put More People in Prison in Order to Keep Seizing Massive Amounts of Property Lawmakers are considering eliminating the authority of Alabama police and prosecutors to seize and keep citizens' property and money without actually convicting them of any crimes. Unsurprisingly, prosecutors and sheriffs in Alabama would like to keep the gravy train going. But they're surprisingly blunt in admitting that they're in it for the money. So, in January two Republican lawmakers stepped up to the plate and introduced legislation that would require that prosecutors actually convict people of crimes in order to keep their stuff, makes sense right? It would put the burden on the state to prove that the property they want to seize is connected to a crime, rather than for the defendant to prove their innocence, makes even more sense, right? It would move the proceeds of forfeiture to the state's general fund to eliminate the profit incentive for police and prosecutors to try to seize whatever they could get their hands on, still, perfectly reasonable, right? On Monday, the head of the Alabama District Attorney's Association and the Alabama Sheriffs Association teamed up with an op-ed that urges against reforms to asset forfeiture. Check out this Doozy: Sending the proceeds of forfeiture to the state's General Fund would result in fewer busts of drug and stolen property rings. What incentive would local police and sheriffs have to invest manpower, resources and time in these operations if they don't receive proceeds to cover their costs? Apparently these Rooster Suckers didn't get the memo that we don't bonus law enforcement in plunder? Can we have Chuck Norris go beat their asses and drill into the heads, at the cadence of head punches, that if you're busting "stolen property rings," you are supposed to be returning that stuff to their rightful owners!?! Time to end the Judicial Doctrine of limited immunity and hold these sonfagoats to the same standards we hold everyone else to.
His name is literally Sheriff Threaten? Also civil forfeiture should be banned and any law enforcement personnel who have engaged in it should be jailed for years.
Yup! End immunity, limited or otherwise, for Judges, Prosecutors and Law Enforcement. Require they carry professional liability insurance and the Insurance Loss Control folks will straighten all this out. The DEA is too powerful. And their record of asset forfeiture backs that up. A new report published by the Justice Department’s Office of the Inspector General suggests that the Drug Enforcement Administration has seized billions of dollars in cash from people who it has not charged with crimes. The report, released in late March, said that since 2007, the DEA has taken over $4 billion in cash from those suspected of involvement with the drug trade. However, 81 percent of those seizures were conducted administratively and did not lead to any civil or criminal charges, according to The Washington Post. In total, that meant $3.2 billion was seized from people who were not charged.
Government Now Wants To Seize Your Car For Going 5MPH Over The Limit Justice Stephen Breyer asked if a state needs revenue, could it force someone to forfeit their Bugatti, Mercedes, or Ferrari for speeding? Even if they were going just 5mph over the speed limit?
on this issue i agree with 1m%. the way some law enforcements capitalize on this is beyond outrageous. fyi, there is a case at the sc with indiana.
Yup! Civil asset forfeiture is a legal process that allows the government to seize assets and cash from citizens without any due process or judicial oversight. You don’t even have to be charged with a crime. You are assumed guilty unless you can somehow prove your innocence. Of course, not everyone has this ability… if you aren’t local, state, or federal law enforcement, this is called stealing, and you go to prison. A 2015 report showed that law enforcement used civil asset forfeiture to steal more from US residents than every thief, robber, and burglar in America combined. About $4.5 BILLION worth of cash, cars, homes, and other property is taken by civil asset forfeiture each year - hundreds of millions more than common criminals steal. Cops will literally keep some of the cars they take as squad cars. And they make a fortune auctioning off the houses, boats, and anything else they confiscate. Obviously this gives cops an incentive to steal, whether or not they actually think the property was used in a crime, or acquired illegally. Remember, civil asset forfeiture adds billions every year to their bottom line. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case of civil asset forfeiture. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-12-01/government-now-wants-seize-your-car-going-5mph-over-limit
We're watching the real time disintegration of the moral and social society of the US, when a Justice of the Supreme Court can even make such a statement with regards to asset forfeiture.
SCOTUS is looking at a case pretty soon that addresses excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishment for seizing an expensive car because the owner had marijuana in their car valued at just 350.00. The value of the car was pretty high. If I remember right it was at least 100k. Edit: nm, I see you have read about it already.
I'm so fed up with abusive government. On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard arguments in a case of civil asset forfeiture. Tyson Timbs was convicted of selling a small amount of drugs to an undercover police officer. He was sentenced to house arrest, and paid about $1,200 in fines. So far, so good But then police used civil asset forfeiture to take his $42,000 Land Rover which Timbs purchased with money from a life insurance policy after his father died. The money did not come from selling drugs, or any other illegal activity. Timbs sued, and the case made its way to the Supreme Court, because every lower court in Indiana said the forfeiture was perfectly legit. That's just opportunistic theft. The case revolves around whether or not the seizure of the Land Rover was an excessive fine under the 8th amendment, and whether or not this protection against excessive fines applies to state governments. The Indiana Solicitor General was arguing in favor of civil asset forfeiture when Justice Stephen Breyer asked him a hypothetical. Breyer asked, if a state needs revenue, could it force someone to forfeit their Bugatti, Mercedes, or Ferrari for speeding? Even if they were going just 5 miles per hour over the speed limit? And the utterly appalling answer from the Indiana Solicitor General was, yes. That’s right... the official government position is that they can steal any amount of your property in “connection” with any crime whatsoever, no matter how trivial the crime may be… even exceeding the speed limit by 5 miles per hour. This is how overbearing and authoritarian the government has become in the land of the free.
My impression what th Justice Breyer's was asking the question in order to show how absurd the State's position was. I think SCOTUS is going to drop the hammer on this.
It's out of hand. S. Carolina Police Agencies Defend Raking in Extra Revenue Through Use of Civil Forfeiture Laws as Extra Revenue Streams. “Innocent citizens shouldn’t have to go to court to get their property back.”
