Lend your son your car, lose it to a state

This won't impact on many of us. But this is a nightmare. RICO law are draconian. A few states have moved to create a more just system when they impose these laws. But imagine your horror when you loan a car to a relative and you learn the relative got pulled over in a traffic stop and now you lose your car. This couple is fighting the problem.

I wish each of us would take time to contact our state to make sure such laws are not used improperly.

http://dailysignal.com/2016/10/12/w...NV1Y0ZFpyWFRIcHpoQ2I4djFlWk5XTnZHTThPND0ifQ==

 

Not seeing the problem. Car was in AZ and the crime was committed in AZ, why shouldn't the state have the right to confiscate property used in crimes? The problem is the parents lent out their car to an unreliable son and don't feel they should be responsible for it.

 

Confiscation/forfeiture of property without so much of a hearing let alone a trial is 100% police state tactics in a government run by men, not laws. That's why states, or local police, or federal agents should not have any right to confiscate property.

 

Well, it is in the Courts now. We need to follow up to find out how it turns out.

 

My problem with this is that there was no conviction. The police basically just took the car and cash, and let the son go. That doesn't help public safety (boy should have been arrested, and charged and tried), just helps the police department's pocketbooks. It's not much better than extortion.

That said, don't let your druggie son drive your car. (and I have two sons driving cars I own).

 

The son wasn't charged with a crime. IMHO, that's the problem. The police shouldn't be able to confiscate anything until there is a conviction--the son wasn't even charged/tried for a crime. This is just legal theft.

 

What crime do you mean?

 

To this day, I see nothing to convict for. I doubt if there is a trial, the jury could convict. Clearly the law is draconian. At least they are getting some legal help. A major problem is the law collects cash. And the cash is used as the prosecutors off office deems in his sole judgement to be used. It is open for corruption.

Then what is the connection of your property to a different person's crime. This assumes there was a crime. There is nothing illegal about owning cash. The cash has to be presumed obtained innocently. But they presumed guilt.

I have long chided posters over saying you are first presumed innocent. As this case shows, the lad was first presumed guilty. They lied that he had a tipping point quantity of marijuana. The law says 2 pounds. And he had just a small amount for himself. The fact one has cash should not lead to the presumption of guilt which the prosecutor did by charging him with money laundering. Then the issue also is he was in Florida so if there was money laundering, was it in Florida so how can AZ charge for out of state crimes? This is pretty complex. But I checked today and believe the parents are still tied up in court with this costing them more and more money.

 

I see it the same way. Thanks.

 

I at least agree with you on that point--sort of. They should be able to confiscate it but not take ownership of it until there is a separate hearing after the person is convicted as to the property. That is how our local prosecutors office handles these matters.

 

Property rights are as sacred as speech rights as the right to go to church is as is the right to, ahem .... vote.

I see far too many people do not understand property rights. The fact you have $31,000 in cash in your car is nobody's right to know of. To blab you have the cash might get you killed. Cops took a tiny amount of pot to imply sales of pot. Perhaps it was cash gained or earned as I say it, in Florida. What is the connection to AZ? This case ought to reach the supreme court. For far too long this entire nation uses rICO laws quite carelessly. Citizens rights to property and privacy are infringed. If a woman has the right to privacy in her womb, I have that right to contents of my car.

I would grant the cops full rights to search in the event of a robbery of a bank and cash was stolen. And witnesses reported the description of the perpetrator plus the car to the point the Cops had a reasonable cause to stop.

This in some cases I back up the cops and the prosecutor.

 

If you have $31K in your car and the prosecutor has to wait until a far off hearing, there won't be $31K to be found on any of your property or in any of your back accounts. Now, there have been some very sketchy cases involving CF, but as far as where I live, if you do not have drugs on hand, they are not taking your car, your money or your house. You have distribution quantities of drugs on hand with that money or in your car, you can kiss them goodbye. Houses they will very infrequently go after, but it is seldom you are going to have a single owner of the property with enough drugs in it with no mortgage or liens to make it worth it.

 

There is something missing from this story and that is the "why"

Was the vehicle unroadworthy?

 

Well now, AZ admit's it is wrong and is returning the automobile.

 

The national problem is that they are able to confiscate on the spot, and do -- lots and lots of times.

 

Something appears to be missing from this story. Was a crime committed in/with their car?

If so, why on earth is anyone upset? And in particular, why are the parents of the criminal upset? They raised him to be a criminal, after all.

 

What other due process do you want to elimiate?

 

If someone commits a crime while using your car it is not justice for you to lose your car.

 

It seems as though civil forfeiture is getting reined in nationally in recent years. Just a couple of weeks ago it was revealed that the IRS was abusing the structuring laws to literally take money from people for no other reason than "just because".

 

I hadn't heard that; good news if true. The opposing force is that some police depts get a big chunk of their money from it.

 

Here's a link.

 

London took my 2001 VW Golf Cabriolet; I was driving unsupervised on a provisional license in Stockwell, Lambeth - I got it out the impound the next day. - The impound was in Charlton, Greenwich.
I was the only person allowed to bail out my car; not another driver, not a transporter, me, and I had never been to Charlton before and suddenly I found myself having to do a drive from there as well as figuring out how to get my car out of the impound... I lacked 1 thing, somebody to sit next to me; asked my friend in my class who has a license, she said yes, we went and got my car.
Shortly after that, I saw the police pull a car outside my house, and I got to see it and it took my interest since this was just after I got my own car back; The police let that driver go! (I over heard the driver say the colour of the car was different or something)..
The other day I was walking along to the shop on the corner and I saw a police car pull over this couple on a scooter with L plates; They impounded it... This was in Thornton Heath, Croydon. As I was passing, I heard one of the police officers telling the driver;
'You have L plates on, you're carrying a passenger'..
Then as I came back, I saw the couple had gone and the police were in the police car parked behind the scooter, just sitting in their police car waiting for the impound truck.

 

I'd fight it I had $31, 000.00 in cash taken too.
I'd probably fight for my 2001 VW too tbh; so; I can see where they're coming from.

I mean...

Either I'm a poor urchin or having $31, 000.00 in cash isn't normal unless you were buying something for $30, 000 and wanted $1, 000 to spend on getting that purchase or whatever, but, IDK.
But then, if you have money anyway... Maybe it's normal? to have that amount of cash on your person?
*I watch too much reality TV shows like Counting Cars and Pawn Stars and American Pickers.
IDK.
That's almost half a year's salary for someone who earns $64k p/a,

 

A massive conflict of interest. Our legal system is a clown show.

 

They went from stopping him for window tint to searching the car for drugs?

WTH?