The Forfeiture Racket
Source
Article: The Forfeiture Racket and Student's Life Savings Seized by Feds
From: Reason.com and Institute for Justice
Overview
These reports of self-serving and largely unconstitutional forfeiture of personal property by federal and local authorities, and the labryinthine state of the appeals process for vulnerable defendants. Key to the problem is that those from whom the assets are seized are never charged with any crime and are denied due process of law and the constitutional protections against confiscation of property.
The Forfeiture Racket
The article begins with the example of $17,000 in cash seized without criminal evidence from a young motorist, on the ostensible expectation that it would be used to buy drugs - and develops into an explanation of how the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984 ignited the widespread use of such tactics by providing for the return of forfeited goods/money to local law enforcement agencies. This obvious conflict of interest "made law enforcement a (special) interest group" that directly benefited from their own seized assets.
Forfeiture defendants are denied court-appointed attorneys, putting them at the mercy of private lawyers who command up to a third of the recovery (with victorious defendants unable to recoup their costs).
Special organizations also sponsor conferences to teach law enforcers how to maximize their asset-seizing potential, though these techniques often undermine actual enforcement of the law, as in "police agencies that identified drug supplies but delayed making busts to maximize the cash they could seize" (since cash is far more lucrative for them than the drugs); thus allowing "untold amounts of illicit drugs to be sold and moved into the streets..."
Moreover, "shakedown"- like episodes ensue from ambiguity in the law: "(between) 2006 and 2008, Tenaha (Texas) police stopped 140 drivers (on a busy casino-bound artery full of reliably cash-rich drivers) and asked them to sign waivers agreeing to hand over their cash, cars, jewelry, (etc) to avoid arrest and prosecution on drug charges. If the drivers agreed, police took their property and waved them down the highway. If they refused, even innocent motorists faced months of legal hassles and thousands of dollars in attorney fees, usually amounting to far more than the value of the amount seized."
Airport Seizure
A 24 yr old returning to school carried $11,000 in cash with him when returning to school in Florida. His bags smelled of marijuana and police took the money and originally charged him with assault on the officer taking the money because he grabed his hand and pushed him. But the charges were dropped and he was never charged with any crime, but the money has been taken by the government to be distributed among multiple policing agencies. And he only recourse is to sue the government and he has the burden of proving that he is innocent rather than the government having to prove that he is guilty.
The Institute for Justice is representing him, but many are not so fortunate. And the government only has to show "preponderance of evidence ... a lower standard than what's used in criminal cases." We don't know if the young man is a drug trafficer or not, but one thing we do know is that a government that can take property on the "presumption" of wrong doing is a tyrrany for those who are exposed to its unbriled power.
Action
Check out Americans for Forfeiture Reform
Contact the Institute for Justice is you are a victim of asset forfeiture
Solutions to Law Enfocement Abuse seeking solutions to the problem of law enforcement abuse
Recommended
Law Enforcement Abuse gateway into the world of criminal law enforcement practices
Arresting Your Property the story of a young man traveling through Nevada having $2000 taken by the police
Airport Seizure $11,000 seized from 24 year old at airport without charging him with a crime