Forfeiture reboot 1.0

[GIThruster]

http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/22/holde ... ium=social

Finally Holder has done something right. Only took 6 years. He still deserves to be impeached.

[Diogenes]

http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/22/holde ... ium=social

Finally Holder has done something right. Only took 6 years. He still deserves to be impeached.

Given his past history, I mistrust his motives. But yeah, we never should have put up with this forfeiture stuff from the very start of it. I am still baffled as to how the courts ever let this go.


It is an obvious fifth amendment violation.

[MSimon]

http://dailysignal.com/2015/01/22/holde ... ium=social

Finally Holder has done something right. Only took 6 years. He still deserves to be impeached.

Given his past history, I mistrust his motives. But yeah, we never should have put up with this forfeiture stuff from the very start of it. I am still baffled as to how the courts ever let this go.

It is an obvious fifth amendment violation.

It is as old as the Republic. Look up forfeiture in regards to piracy and slave ships.

Trouble is it was designed for cases where the owner was unknown. Hardly true in most cases these days.

And of course the purpose was to fight Drugs. Anything to fight drugs, eh? That is why Americans went along with it. To fight the evil dope.

=========================

Why are Holder and Obama doing this? They are beginning the wind down of Prohibition. I expect they think the government will lose this case.

http://edca.typepad.com/eastern_distric ... uana-case/

Note: they did not fight it very hard. One semi-incompetent lawyer and one witness. While the defense has a team and lots of witnesses. I think the DOJ threw the case. Not that they had the merits of the argument on their side in any event. But they made sure of a loss.

=========================

Also note the Republicans in Congress are in on it too. By stealth.

http://edca.typepad.com/eastern_distric ... -law-.html

By protecting Medical Cannabis States they created a contradiction in the law.

[GIThruster]

And of course the purpose was to fight Drugs. Anything to fight drugs, eh? That is why Americans went along with it. To fight the evil dope.

Yes. Originally it was used to give access to the fantastically expensive GoFast boats that were being used by smugglers, to the law enforcement services that were chasing them.

I'm surprised you admit that Americans in general do support taking aggressive and at times even over-the-top action against drugs. Are you admitting the value in the democratic rule of law, where the people have the right to determine whether the individual should be prosecuted for drug violations? As a career criminal who is continually contemptuous of such authority, I had supposed you had some crackpot excuse for your criminal behavior. Especially now today, when you could move to CO or WA and find authorization for your criminal behavior and yet choose not to, I would have guessed you had some pathetic excuse for your criminality. Surely if you believe the teeming masses have a right to make the laws what they are, you can have no such excuse.

[MSimon]

And of course the purpose was to fight Drugs. Anything to fight drugs, eh? That is why Americans went along with it. To fight the evil dope.

Yes. Originally it was used to give access to the fantastically expensive GoFast boats that were being used by smugglers, to the law enforcement services that were chasing them.

I'm surprised you admit that Americans in general do support taking aggressive and at times even over-the-top action against drugs. Are you admitting the value in the democratic rule of law, where the people have the right to determine whether the individual should be prosecuted for drug violations? As a career criminal who is continually contemptuous of such authority, I had supposed you had some crackpot excuse for your criminal behavior. Especially now today, when you could move to CO or WA and find authorization for your criminal behavior and yet choose not to, I would have guessed you had some pathetic excuse for your criminality. Surely if you believe the teeming masses have a right to make the laws what they are, you can have no such excuse.

Used to. But like Prohibition I Americans are finding out it costs more than it is worth and are moving against it. What has helped most in that move is that Prohibition has most directly affected the youth and having lived in a police state they are none too fond of it. That started in the 60s and has continued to this day. Say about 40+ years worth.

The last hold outs are the over 65 crowd and they are dying out. Faith in government is not what it used to be.

On top of that the lies about cannabis have made people sceptical of any pronouncements by government. The youth having had actual experience with the drugs. Because despite Prohibition cannabis is a rite of passage in America. Bill Clinton ring a bell? An the current occupant. Not to mention rumors of Bush.

So the war on youth. The war on Blacks. The war on the poor (the well off get good lawyers). And pretty soon any one with a social conscience is an anti-Prohibitionist.

When it is widely recognized that alcohol is a more dangerous drug than cannabis - well the end is nigh.

And as to my point about Americans once upon a time liking Prohibition? I like facing reality. It makes it easier to change it.

I might add that the medical value of cannabinoids hasn't hurt.

Sadly - I think the hold outs among the Republicans will sink the party for another Presidential election or two. Pity. Because they do foreign policy and economics better than the Ds. You ought to study the anti-Prohibition election of 1932. There are some lessons there. If you are capable of learning them.

[MSimon]

As to criminality. The Republicans of 1914 believed that the Federal government had no authority to pass a Prohibition law.

IMO they still don't. So who are the real criminals?

And denying people medicine is universally recognized as a government crime.

So I'm of the opinion that all our governments are criminal in this matter. And because you support their criminality that makes you a criminal too.

Have a nice day.

[williatw]

Reboot my Arse:



Loretta Lynch’s Worrisome Answer on Civil Asset Forfeiture

Referring to the federal government’s forfeiture regime as “an important tool” in fighting crime, attorney general nominee Loretta Lynch staunchly defended the concept of civil asset forfeiture during the first day of her confirmation hearings.

After Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) questioned the “fundamental fairness” of Americans having their property taken by the government without any proof (or often even suspicion) of criminal wrongdoing, Lynch asserted that there are “safeguards at every step of the process” to protect innocent people, “certainly implemented by [her] office … as well as an opportunity to be heard.”

Even setting aside the litany of federal civil asset forfeiture abuses that have come to light recently across the country, Lynch’s reference to her own office’s handling of civil forfeiture is particularly concerning.

Lynch is currently the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, and her office, despite its safeguards, is responsible for one of the more publicized and questionable uses of the asset forfeiture program. In May of 2012 the Hirsch brothers, joint owners of Bi-County Distributors in Long Island, had their entire bank account drained by the Internal Revenue Service working in conjunction with Lynch’s office. Many of Bi-County’s customers paid in cash, and when the brothers made several deposits under $10,000, federal agents accused them of “structuring” their deposits in order to avoid the reporting requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act. Without so much as a criminal charge, the federal government emptied the account, totaling $446,651.11.

For more than two years, and in defiance of the 60-day deadline for the initiation of proceedings included in the Civil Asset Forfeiture Reform Act of 2000, Lynch’s office simply sat on the money while the Hirsch brothers survived off the goodwill their business had engendered with its vendors over the decades.

That case, which was handled by the Institute for Justice, finally ended just days ago when Lynch’s office quietly returned the money, having found no evidence of any wrongdoing. The Hirsch brothers and their business survived, but just how many law-abiding small businesses can afford to give the government a 33-month, interest-free loan of nearly half a million dollars?

Civil asset forfeiture is rife with government abuse. The tales of lost livelihoods and predatory government agencies are legion. The data support the indignation. A bipartisan coalition of congressmen and even the current attorney general himself have acknowledged the need for reform.

Unfortunately, Lynch’s comments and her history as a champion of civil forfeiture inspire little hope that major and much-needed reform is imminent at the Department of Justice.

http://www.cato.org/blog/loretta-lynchs ... forfeiture

Lee questions Loretta Lynch on Prosecutorial Discretion, Operation Chokepoint, and Asset Forfeiture

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJAxR93PkTk

[choff]

If civil asset forfeiture is being repealed and it makes up an essential part of local police budgets how on earth with they make up the balance. Maybe they'll sell some of those newly acquired armored vehicles at police auctions?

[GIThruster]

More likely they will stop practicing with hollow point ammo, buying the latest body armor each year, and purchasing armored vehicles that never find any real use. I'm sure they'll find corners they can cut. remember, the forfeiture laws were originally to fund extravagance like Go-Fast interdiction boats, not support general operations. It can be set right.

[MSimon]

More likely they will stop practicing with hollow point ammo, buying the latest body armor each year, and purchasing armored vehicles that never find any real use. I'm sure they'll find corners they can cut. remember, the forfeiture laws were originally to fund extravagance like Go-Fast interdiction boats, not support general operations. It can be set right.

In DC the median (average?) forfeiture was $141. That shows it was just highway robbery. It may be why DC voted 70% for legalization.

More details: http://www.washingtonpost.com/investiga ... story.html

Half of the more than $5.5 million in cash seizures involved $141 or less, with more than 1,000 involving less than $20. D.C. police have seized more than 1,000 cars, some for minor offenses allegedly committed by the children or friends of the vehicles’ owners, documents show.