It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Video: Biggest Police State Scam Ever: "Civil Asset Forfeiture"

page: 1
22
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+4 more 
posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
This is one under reported and GROTESQUE abuse of authoritorian powers, and I'm sure many are unaware of it.

"Civil Asset Forfeiture" is a loose law and activity practiced by "authorities" on multiple levels of law enforcement.

Basically what it allows them to do, WITHOUT ANY CRIME ACTUALLY CHARGED OR COMMITTED, is to confiscate anything deemed of value from you, and to either keep it, or sell it off in "auction" type events to profiteer and make money for their departments. And as this video goes on to point out, many times this takes the form of ridiculous allocations of said property and capital.

This is legalized ROBBERY folks, handed down from the highest levels, all the way to your local neighborhood.

Anyone arguing that there is not police state, authoritorian rule taking place needs look no further than this.

Something to be highly aware of, and proactive against. Call and write your local, regional, and state officials, and let them know that this is an absolute infringement upon our human and constitutional rights.





posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 01:17 PM
link   
This was one of the issues we discussed in depth at a meeting I went to last year. If you stock pile food or assets in preparation of a natural disaster, war, or other... they can confiscate it legally. Your preparations can be taken to provide for those who refused to prepare. This is just ONE SMALL issue with what you are speaking of... but one that should cause our community here to sit up and take notice.

Great thread.. as most of yours are



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
I have known several people this has happened too from a guy that had too much money on him......it was an inheritence.........to a businesswoman who had her home and business taken because a customer at her store was caught with ONE JOINT leaving her business. The cops were like kids in a candy store looting her business laqughing and talking about how they were going to "make a mint" of her.


Its legilized robbery and its discusting. I am sure or founding fathers would agree, after all they had a revolution for less



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 01:48 PM
link   
It is big business too
www.seizedpropertyauctions.com...



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Bunch of legends in their own minds thinkin' they are the alpha males marking their
"territory"....LEOs are just as bad as doctors...there are more in it for the "money" and less in it
for those they are sworn to protect and serve. Kind of does mess it up for the few, the real, that
are not jaded yet.

Thanks for the post.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:31 PM
link   
As much as it would pain me to destroy my own property, I'd do so before allowing it to be sold to fund a criminal cabal.

These idiots seem to forget the age old mantra that a man with nothing has nothing to lose. Stealing a man's property and then selling it is the hallmark of tyranny and only further proves how far down the slippery slope we have gone.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bozzchem
 


You probably wouldnt get a chance too, the 55 yearold (at the time) woman I spoke had 20 cops with machine guns and body armor storm her business, threw her to the ground, putting a gash on her head from the counter she was behind, hand cuffed her while a couple 250 pound men knelt on the 120 pound womans back.

Her crime?

one of her customers had a joint and was pulled over leaving her store, they told him they would drop charges if he "admited" he had got it from her at her business



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:55 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


The only time we can seize assets is if its attached to the investigation. For the County Sheriffs Office, since they are responsible solely for civil process within the county, if a civil court case is finished, and the judge issues an award to one party, and the other parrty refuses to pay, the judge will sign off on a court order that allows Deputies or Court Officers (depending on jurisdictions - Court Officers work for the court itself) to go seize property from the person who is not paying.

This property will be auctioned off in order to satisfy the debt. The person whose property has been seazied has legal recourse, and provided they make a daily contact to the entity who seized the items, the agency is unable to auction them.

The other type of forclosure of property for municpal departments is going to be drug related. If it comes down to trafficing (not small personal amounts) any cash attached to the crime as well as property can be seized. Generally if its large enough the investigation will go to the Feds. If a local agency keeps the investigation if it was declined by the feds, any property seizures involved are locked into evidence until the entire case is done, all appeals are done, and only then a judge has to sign off on the property either being destroyed, or used.

If the property seized is going to be used for law enforcement purposes (how some agencies will have seized vehicles that go to the DARE program and want not) there is a pretty strict guideline that must be followed. Some states have laws that require either all seized, or partial amounts seized, to go to the school system.

Law Enforcement cannot just randomly take items from people and sell it. The video is wrong and not showing the entire process involved. Any items legally seized cannot just be taken by the Police and sold or used. They have to go through a process that respects it as evidence, must await for all appeals / court cases to be resolved, in addition to any challenges by people who might be owed money who want to stake a claim.

Please do not beleive everything you see on youtube.

For Federal guidlines, the US Marshall's are responsible for Federal Seziures of Assets
Asset forfeiture program - US Marshal's

Their authority comes from the Criminal Control Acts passed by the FEderal Government in the 1930's. The laws were not touched again until an onmibus bill in 1984, which updated fedral criminal laws, seizure of property, sentencing guidelines etc.

The affected US Code is - Title 18 - US Code

Seziures at the State level are dependant upon the states law, any state court cases that created case law dealing with it, and any Federal appeals rulings that have occured in their respective circuits. I am not going to provide any links since the state level is all over the place depending on state law.

I can tell you that any items sezied by local, county, state or federal officals must be inventoried and securely stored. The owner of the seized property must be given a detailed list of items taken. The value of the items is not based on fair market value, but what it can get at an auction.

There is recourse for citizens at both the FEderal and State level to challenge seizures. If a seizure occurs its either by court order, or by criminal statute, which means a legal reason based on current statutes must exist for the sizure to be valid.

Hope this helps clear some of this up.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Advantage
This was one of the issues we discussed in depth at a meeting I went to last year. If you stock pile food or assets in preparation of a natural disaster, war, or other... they can confiscate it legally. Your preparations can be taken to provide for those who refused to prepare. This is just ONE SMALL issue with what you are speaking of... but one that should cause our community here to sit up and take notice.

Great thread.. as most of yours are


No really we cant.. Can you please provide a link to where this info is? Law Enforcement cannot jsut show up at random and take items.

The only legal manner, whuich aside from mass disasters is illegal is food. It is not against the law to "loot" food items. This is case by case, and is restricted to just food items. I would not try to put this to the test if a tornado hits.. Its geared towards Katrina style problems.
edit on 10-1-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by DimensionalDetective
 


It is a lot worse than people think! [FEAR is an organization fighting these nasty laws]


"Civil asset forfeiture has allowed police to view all of America as some giant national K-Mart, where prices are not just lower, but non-existent — a sort of law enforcement 'pick-and-don't-pay.'" —U.S. Representative Henry Hyde

The Spring 2007 edition of Justice Policy Journal features a 31 page treatise, Civil Asset Forfeiture: Why Law Enforcement Has Changed its Motto from "To Serve and Protect" to "Show Me the Money," in which Jared Shoemaker examines the negative impact on law enforcement goals and practices when police agencies aggressively pursue civil asset forfeitures as a means of supplementing their budgets, as well as how police agencies' addiction to forfeiture revenue leads to disregard for individual due process rights, sometimes with tragic and life-altering consequences for innocent individuals....

The Double-Edged Sword undercover researcher observed agencies abandon investigations of suspects they knew were trafficking large amounts of contraband simply because the case was not profitable. Agents routinely targeted low level dealers rather than big traffickers, who are better able to insulate themselves and their assets from reverse sting operations. The report states: "Efficiency is measured by the amount of money seized rather than impact on drug trafficking."

A reverse sting operation, where the officer becomes the seller who encourages the suspect to commit a crime, "was the preferred strategy of every agency and department with which the researcher was associated because it allowed agents to gauge potential profit prior to investing a great deal of time and effort." More importantly, the narcotics units studied preferred seizing cash intended for purchase of drugs supplied by the police, rather than confiscating drugs already on the street. When asked why a search warrant would not be served on a suspect known to have resale quantities of contraband, one officer responded:

"Because that would just give us a bunch of dope and the hassle of having to book him (the suspect). We've got all the dope we need in the property room, just stick to rounding up cases with big money and stay away from warrants."

In one case an agency instructed the researcher to observe the suspect's daily transactions reselling a large shipment of coc aine so that officers could postpone making the bust until after the majority of the drug shipment was converted to cash. This case was only one of many in which the goal was profit rather than reducing the supply of drugs reaching the street.

Thirteen additional years of policing for profit have now entrenched agencies in a dependency on forfeiture revenue that continues to subordinate the pursuit ot justice to the pursuit of profit. ... www.fear.org...


After reading this can we have anything but contempt for LEOs and for Congress? Between Civil Asset Forefieture and the Federal Reserve there can be no doubt that all we are is sheep to be sheared by our overlords!




posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 02:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Holly N.R.A.
Bunch of legends in their own minds thinkin' they are the alpha males marking their
"territory"....LEOs are just as bad as doctors...there are more in it for the "money" and less in it
for those they are sworn to protect and serve. Kind of does mess it up for the few, the real, that
are not jaded yet.

Thanks for the post.


LOLOLOLOl... I gurantee you we did not go into law enforcement for money. Is it possible for people to actually do some research in these areas before spouting misinformation and inuendo?

Your personal views are fine, but not always based in fact.

Thats all im asking, do some research and ask questions before jumping onto the bandwagon.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
It is big business too
www.seizedpropertyauctions.com...


At least you got the link right. What you arent showing is the manner in which items are seized at the Federal or State level. Go back and research how the FEds come into possession of these items, as ell as local law enforcement. Its not as easy as you make it out to be.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   
There was a case in 1992 where a man owned a considerable-sized ranch near a state park in California. Los Angeles pulled a raid on the man's ranch in hopes of claiming his property. Raided in middle of the night in his home in the remote area the police immediately shot and killed him as he responded to their intrusion. What was discovered is that his property was not actually in Los Angeles County but located in neighboring Ventura County which brought in that county's District Attorney.

It seems to be the man, Donald P. Scott, was being set-up for asset forfeiture. None of the LA county Sheriff Department's alleged suspicions after a long investigation proved accurate.

en.wikipedia.org...


Early on the morning of October 2, 1992, 31 officers from the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Border Patrol, National Guard and Park Service entered the Scott's 200-acre (0.81 km2) ranch. [2] They planned to arrest Scott for allegedly running a 4,000-plant marijuana plantation.[1] When deputies broke down the door to Scott's house, Scott's wife would later tell reporters, she screamed, "Don't shoot me. Don't kill me."[3] That brought Scott staggering out of the bedroom, bleary-eyed from a cataract operation -- holding a .38 caliber Colt snub-nosed revolver over his head.[4] When he emerged at the top of the stairs (note: this was a one-story residence), holding his gun over his head, the officers told him to lower the gun. As he did, they shot him to death. According to the official report, the gun was pointed at the officers when they shot him. [1]

Despite a subsequent search of Scott's ranch using helicopters, dogs, searchers on foot, and a high-tech Jet Propulsion Laboratory device for detecting trace amounts of sinsemilla, no marijuana -- or any other illegal drug -- was found.[5] (boldface emphasis added)


This had a lot of fallout and set back asset forfeiture efforts for quite a time. This was done just before the law was up for renewal but this case was used as an example of how it can be abused and why the forfeiture laws should not exist. As this was nearly twenty years ago for many it was forgotten and for others that hope it would be forgotten. Be very wary of permitting laws to enter the books that would permit this kind of thing to happen again to happen again.

For more information about this incident - www.saveourguns.com...


edit on 10-1-2011 by Erongaricuaro because: edited to add informational link

edit on 10-1-2011 by Erongaricuaro because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by lastrebel
reply to post by bozzchem
 


You probably wouldnt get a chance too, the 55 yearold (at the time) woman I spoke had 20 cops with machine guns and body armor storm her business, threw her to the ground, putting a gash on her head from the counter she was behind, hand cuffed her while a couple 250 pound men knelt on the 120 pound womans back.

Her crime?

one of her customers had a joint and was pulled over leaving her store, they told him they would drop charges if he "admited" he had got it from her at her business


Please provide a source for this story...



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by bozzchem
As much as it would pain me to destroy my own property, I'd do so before allowing it to be sold to fund a criminal cabal.

These idiots seem to forget the age old mantra that a man with nothing has nothing to lose. Stealing a man's property and then selling it is the hallmark of tyranny and only further proves how far down the slippery slope we have gone.


Idiots huh...

id·i·ot   /ˈɪdiət/ Show Spelled
[id-ee-uht] Show IPA

–noun
1. an utterly foolish or senseless person.
2. Psychology . a person of the lowest order in a former classification of mental retardation, having a mental age of less than three years old and an intelligence quotient under 25.


Foolish or sensless.. As it not having any facts on the topic at hand. Please do research into this so you do not look like an idiot while continuing to repeat false / misleading information that leaves out several key steps.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet

After reading this can we have anything but contempt for LEOs and for Congress? Between Civil Asset Forefieture and the Federal Reserve there can be no doubt that all we are is sheep to be sheared by our overlords!



How about instead you do some indpendant research on your own rather than taking the lazy way out and citing from a source that is incorrect?



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Xcath, you know I respect you friend, but I have to say in this case I can not agree with you entirely.

Here is a classic case that I reported not long ago, where even when the department was ordered to give back cash by the courts because no law was violated, they REFUSED to do so:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

So this IS happening. Now just how widespread it is occuring may be subject to debate. But this is definitely something for the average citizen to be aware of, as the loopholes here seem to be the doorway for certain opportunistic departments to take advantage of. I know you are a good officer, but you, as well as I, know that not everybody has the morals and ethics you do. And something like this is not in the average joe's favor when it comes to those types.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 




First is from Executive Orders in place dating back to 1939 which Clinton grouped together under one order, EO #12919 released on June 6, 1994.

The following EOs all fall under EO#12919:

10995–Federal seizure of all communications media in the US;
10997–Federal seizure of all electric power, fuels, minerals, public and private;
10998--Federal seizure of all food supplies and resources, public and private and all farms and equipment;
10999–Federal seizure of all means of transportation, including cars, trucks, or vehicles of any kind and total control over all highways, seaports and water ways;
11000–Federal seizure of American people for work forces under federal supervision, including the splitting up of families if the government so desires;
11001–Federal seizure of all health, education and welfare facilities, both public and private;
11002–Empowers the Postmaster General to register every single person in the US
11003–Federal seizure of all airports and aircraft;
11004–Federal seizure of all housing and finances and authority to establish forced relocation. Authority to designate areas to be abandoned as “unsafe,” establish new locations for populations, relocate communities, build new housing with public funds;
11005–Seizure of all railroads, inland waterways and storage facilities, both public and private;
11051--Provides FEMA complete authorization to put above orders into effect in times of increased international tension of economic or financial crisis (FEMA will be in control incase of “National Emergency”).

These EOs are not aimed at anti-hoarding but rather at seizure or confiscation of items and facilities “to provide a state of readiness in these resource areas with respect to all conditions of national emergency, including attack upon the United States.” You’ll find most ’seizure’ legislation ends with this phrase. These Executive Orders don’t define what specifically constitutes a national emergency and maybe this is as it should be. The specifics on hoarding are left up to the individual states.


Just ONE explanation. I sent an email to my local and he is at work.. may have more info for you later if you still refute the Executive orders, Fema mandates, and PDD (Presidential Decision Directives).

corditecountryshownotes.wordpress.com...



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Erongaricuaro
 


If you are going to cite a story please get it right. The incident from 1992 occured in Los Angeles County, by LA County DEputies in conjunction with several other agencies, including the FEderal Government. While the argument was the officers wanted the property, in reality the property was tagged for supposedly growing a good chunk of Marijuana.

When deputies, as well as agents from the DEA, Border Patrol and Parks Department arrived on scene with an arrest warrant for the property owner, who was accused of smuggeling over 4000 pounds of marijuana. Law Enforcement had to break the door down.

His wife then screamed dont kill me, which is when the intoxicated suspect came out of the back room with a gun in his hand. It was only when the guy pointed the gun at the deputies, did they shoot.

Source


Early on the morning of Oct. 2, 1992, 31 officers from the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, Drug Enforcement Administration, Border Patrol, National Guard and Park Service came roaring down the narrow dirt road to Scott's rustic 200-acre ranch. They planned to arrest Scott, the wealthy, eccentric, hard-drinking heir to a Europe-based chemicals fortune, for allegedly running a 4,000-plant marijuana plantation. When deputies broke down the door to Scott's house, Scott's wife would later tell reporters, she screamed, "Don't shoot me. Don't kill me." That brought Scott staggering out of the bedroom, hung-over and bleary-eyed -- he'd just had a cataract operation -- holding a .38 caliber Colt snub-nosed revolver over his head. When he pointed it in the direction of the deputies, they killed him.



In the end a search of the property did not reveal any marijuana plants. The use of force was justified under law, and the entire raid was reviewed and all information used to start the operation was valid.

A 100 million dollar lawsuit was filed, and in the end they accepted a 3 million dollar payout from the County, whoi opted not to fight it because of... wait for it... the cost of lawsuits.

The manner you portray this incident is inccorect, and you are leaving out important information to put it in context. This is what I am talking about when it comes to understanding law enforcement actions, and how people see what they want and repeat it as fact to paint a picture that never occured.



posted on Jan, 10 2011 @ 03:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 





No really we cant.. Can you please provide a link to where this info is? Law Enforcement cannot jsut show up at random and take items.


I read the entire 31 page treatise, [/iCivil Asset Forfeiture: Why Law Enforcement Has Changed its Motto from "To Serve and Protect" to "Show Me the Money," but it is no longer available online.
I gave the link to FEAR because they have everything all there and handy to reference. If you want the actual laws you can go to the left hand side and click on the Law Library. The law library lists the laws. click on the law listed and it take you to the actual written law.

As far as I am concerned why the heck should I waste my time researching every single law when it is all available and nicely packaged at one site?


Why do we FEAR asset forfeiture?
Incredible as it sounds, civil asset forfeiture laws allow the government to seize property without charging anyone with a crime....

Seized property was presumed guilty and could be forfeited based upon mere hearsay—even a tip supplied by by an informant who stood to gain up to 25% of the forfeited assets. Owners were forced into the untenable situation of trying to prove a negative—that something never happened, even though no proof of any illegal act had been offered at trial.

Newspapers and television stories across the nation documented hundreds of cases of innocent citizens wrongfully deprived of their homes, businesses and livlihoods. Eighty percent of property forfeited to the US during the previous decade was seized from owners who were never even charged with a crime! Over $7 billion has been forfeited to the federal government since 1985. Until the advent of FEAR law enforcement officials promoting expanded forfeiture laws comprised the overwhelming majority of lobbyists at hearings on forfeiture litigation. Meanwhile, prosecutors complained that police were less available to investigate crimes that did not involve forfeiture.

Over 200 federal forfeiture laws are attached to non-drug related crimes. Even a false statement on a loan application can trigger forfeiture. Physicians are subject to forfeiture of their entire assets based on a clerical errors in medicare billing. The government even tried to forfeit a farmer's tractor for allegedly running over an endangered rat..... www.fear.org...

edit on 10-1-2011 by crimvelvet because: Added paragraphs




top topics



 
22
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join