Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Civil forfeiture


Red Cent

Recommended Posts

Tascosa, he wasn't just "walking around".  His experience led him to believe he was doing the right thing. 

 

The dollar amount has nothing to do with the price of eggs in China.  Our laws were built on due process and a trial, if necessary.

 

Has anyone caught the fact that he has never been charged? 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Tascosa, SASS# 24838 said:

 

I will just say that there are darn few honest people that walk around with over $10,000 in their pocket.

 

Don't like the law... Change it!

 

Surely you aren't saying that we should presume anyone with a large amount of cash should be treated as guilty and forced to prove their innocence.

As for the second part, you keep saying that. There only seems to be one small problem. According to the lawsuit the gentleman has filed, the government isn't following the law. If you click the link below, it will show you the filing, If you begin around page five, and continue through page seven, it will outline the Plaintiff's claims. Assuming the claims are valid, what law should be changed to get the government to follow the law?

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2018/05/20180531103121666.pdf?noredirect=on

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tascosa, SASS# 24838 said:

 

Well this has gone on long enough. I will just say that there are darn few honest people that walk around with over $10,000 in their pocket. Al Capone wasn't jailed for murder, extortion, selling illegal whiskey, the feds got him for tax evasion! Law enforcement doesn't make the laws, but they use what ever Congress gives them. Don't like the law... Change it!

Changing the law sounds like an excellent idea, but going to court to insure that police officers are actually following the law is also a good plan.

 

By the way, you are correct that they got Capone on tax evasion, but they proved it in court. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Tascosa, SASS# 24838 said:

 

Well this has gone on long enough. I will just say that there are darn few honest people that walk around with over $10,000 in their pocket. 

I reckon I'll have around that much in MY pocket when we go on vacation this year and drop by EoT on the way up and back. That makes me a criminal?

Let's see, I gotta pay Yul Lose for our new cart, Aspen Filley wasnt a 50% deposit, spent $1600 at the vendor with the carved moose horns last year and may again if he's there this year, spending a week at VERY pricey hotel in Ouray, pay for 4WD trips out of Ouray, buy souvineers, etc. Should I go on?

And why not use a credit card, you might ask? Well, I don';t LIKE credit cards, for one thing. And the ONE I have has a limit of $500. (A LOT of CC debt years back-never again!).  And, I happen to LIKE cash. I never had much in my life before, and now I have a little. It feels good. And I never had ANYONE tell me they don't accept it!

Oh, and in case you're wondering, it ISN'T drug money- our business has been doing well the last few years.

So I guess I'm one of the darn few, and don't be so quick to assume that people with a bit of cash are criminals.

And as far as I'm concerned anyone with a gun who tries to STEAL my money is an armed robber.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, DocWard said:

 

Surely you aren't saying that we should presume anyone with a large amount of cash should be treated as guilty and forced to prove their innocence.

As for the second part, you keep saying that. There only seems to be one small problem. According to the lawsuit the gentleman has filed, the government isn't following the law. If you click the link below, it will show you the filing, If you begin around page five, and continue through page seven, it will outline the Plaintiff's claims. Assuming the claims are valid, what law should be changed to get the government to follow the law?

 

 

Isn't there something called a Writ of Mandamus that requests the court to make the government follow it's own laws?

 

Duffield

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Duffield, SASS #23454 said:

Isn't there something called a Writ of Mandamus that requests the court to make the government follow it's own laws?

 

Duffield

 

Thanks! You just caused me to flash back to my first day of law school! Now I'm sitting here in a cold sweat!

You're close. The quick and simple answer is that a Writ of Mandamus is an order issued by a court to either a public official or on occasion an inferior court, compelling them to perform their duty under the law. However "Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy, which should only be used in exceptional circumstances of peculiar emergency or public importance," and "Courts have no authority to grant relief in the nature of mandamus if the plaintiff has an adequate legal remedy aside from mandamus, such as a suit for monetary judgment or the opportunity to raise the legal issues involved in a suit brought by the government."

https://www.justice.gov/usam/civil-resource-manual-215-mandamus

In the current case, the action for the return of the money is the correct avenue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/1/2018 at 3:51 PM, Phantom Falcon, SASS # 46139 said:

No forfeiture until a felony conviction.  Too many cops and/or their supervisors get greedy and corrupt and think of it as "supplementary budget". 

 

PF

 

Did someone mention "supplementary budget"? And this was actually legal :unsure:

 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/alabama-sheriff-legally-pocketed-750k-from-inmate-food-funds-bought-beach-house/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Civil forfeiture laws strike me as being mostly unconstitutional under both federal and Tennessee's laws. Taking property without Due Process is not constitutionally allowed.  So the question is are the laws giving due process?

 

 Why do I need 10K or more in cash on my person?  Same response as to why I need a semi auto firearm-need has nothing to do with it.  Maybe I am going to buy a car and want to have leverage to get a better deal.  It is irrelevant.

 

For those who don't realize it, Civil Forfeiture laws can be used to take anything, including your home.  When someone is charged with a crime, forfeiture laws can result in their inability to afford an attorney to represent them.

 

They are bad news and should be challenged and opposed whenever possible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Constitution is violated constantly and not by the Police but by the Law makers in Congress. If you have a problem with seizure laws change them. The police sure didn't make the law about the transfer of $10,000 or more to notify the government nor did they make the law about seizing that. Instead of blaming the cops blame the people that voted for that law. The same people you voted into office over and over. Sorry , cops just use the tools they are provided with.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tascosa, SASS# 24838 said:

Our Constitution is violated constantly and not by the Police but by the Law makers in Congress. If you have a problem with seizure laws change them. The police sure didn't make the law about the transfer of $10,000 or more to notify the government nor did they make the law about seizing that. Instead of blaming the cops blame the people that voted for that law. The same people you voted into office over and over. Sorry , cops just use the tools they are provided with.

 

Uh... if you read most of the posting above and the links, it's pretty clear that that's exactly what people are trying to do!

 

And just because a law exists that gives some badge-heavy cop a "legal right" to do something fundamentally bad sure doesn't make it right - and sorry, but in my not-so-humble opinion, anyone in law enforcement who chooses to exercise that "legal right" over morals and ethics needs another career.  -_-

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tascosa, SASS# 24838 said:

Our Constitution is violated constantly and not by the Police but by the Law makers in Congress. If you have a problem with seizure laws change them. The police sure didn't make the law about the transfer of $10,000 or more to notify the government nor did they make the law about seizing that. Instead of blaming the cops blame the people that voted for that law. The same people you voted into office over and over. Sorry , cops just use the tools they are provided with.

 

OK... One more time... According to the article and the complaint in the lawsuit, at this point in time, the government is NOT FOLLOWING THE LAW. That's all caps, bolded, italicized and underlined, for those keeping track. You keep hammering on changing the law, but that argument is wholly irrelevant to the matter. At this point, even the legality of the initial seizure is irrelevant. Please, please explain to me how changing the law is going to get this man some resolution? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.