It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Have you heard of the term "civil asset forfeiture"?
Yes . . . . 28%
No . . . . .72%
It should be 95% but ok, maybe they interviewed some cops.
Which of these three options comes closest to your opinion about what SHOULD be legal?
Law enforcement should only be able to permanently seize money or other property if that person is charged with and convicted of a crime . . . . . . . . . 71%
So public servants being paid by the tax payers are now dictating legislation?
Forfeiture programs are under more scrutiny these days, but attempts to roll back these powers, or introduce conviction requirements, have been met with resistance from law enforcement agencies and police unions
Under state and federal law, police departments can seize and keep property that is suspected of involvement in criminal activity. Unlike criminal asset forfeiture, however, with civil forfeiture, a property owner need not be found guilty of a crime—or even charged—to permanently lose her cash, car, home, or other property. And according to a new report published by the Institute for Justice, “Policing for Profit: The Abuse of Civil Asset Forfeiture,” most state laws are written in such a way as to encourage police agents to pursue profit instead of seeking the neutral administration of justice. The report grades each state and the federal government on its forfeiture laws and other measures of abuse. The results are appalling: Six states earned an F and 29 states and the federal government received a grade of D. Please join us for a discussion of policing, constitutional rights, and government accountability.
Waco police have impounded about 135 motorcycles and 80 cars and trucks from the parking lot where nine people were shot dead on May 17. Police have said the vehicles were needed for evidence.
It’s possible some of the vehicles could be declared illegal contraband associated with a crime, and ownership transferred to the county through a process known as civil forfeiture. The collective value of the vehicles likely exceeds $1 million, assuming typical vehicle values.
But Reyna is known for aggressive pursuit of civil forfeiture, and defense attorneys are watching his moves in this case where so much property is at stake and so many owners are in jail.
Since 1989, Texas has given government agencies the ability to seize property through a civil lawsuit even if there is no criminal case. The claim is filed not against the owner but the property, such as a bag of coc aine, a speedboat or a sum of cash. One recent Texas lawsuit was styled “U.S. vs. approximately 64,695 pounds of shark fins.”
Chapter 59 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure allows prosecutors to claim property that was bought with proceeds from a felony, or that was used in the commission of a felony. Between 2003 and 2012, Texas law enforcement confiscated some $486 million through asset forfeiture, according to a December 2014 report to the Texas Legislature by the Public Policy Research Institute.
Civil forfeitures are “extremely profitable” for district attorneys, who on average spent $702 prosecuting a forfeiture case in return for $15,182 in proceeds, the report states.
Since Reyna was took office in 2011 he has boasted of taking more than $1 million of contraband through forfeiture, including cars, computers, eight-liner machines, even fancy hubcaps. He used the process to acquire a 2004 Freightliner trailer-tractor rig that was seized by state troopers in 2011, a truck that ended up with County Commissioner Ben Perry’s precinct.
Reyna’s office uses 30 percent of the proceeds from the forfeitures and shares 70 percent with the agency that seized the goods.
originally posted by: deadcatsrule
Aside from the money they can take everything you own just on a suspicion of what ever they want.dont have to prove it.i remember reading a few years back a pilot lost his jet and cash for fuel landing fees just because he mite have trsnsprted a drug dealer at one time in the past...
originally posted by: peter_kandra
a reply to: gladtobehere
It's definitely disturbing. I've read of horror stories where people have a few thousand dollars cash on them to go buy a used car or something, get stopped and searched, and the money taken. WTF. Hell, I like paying cash for incidental purchases and things, so I'll hit the ATM once a month and carry around a few hundred dollars. I also heard, not sure if it's true, that quite a bit of money in circulation would test positive for drug residue.
My opinion is that any property should only be seized AFTER being convicted...period. Anything else is a violation of due process.
originally posted by: WCmutant
I've been giving the Civil Asset Forfeiture phenomenon some serious pondering. To me, there are several things to consider the "WHY":
1. In the short-term it benefits law enforcement and municipalities
2. In the long-term it can aid in the "narrative" to push us toward a cashless society
So, consider that TPTB are playing chess. The first move pisses us off. The second move allows the idiots in the populace to have a knee-jerk reaction and support a cashless society.