[Doofy]

ISIL -- Civil Asset Forfeiture: The Looting of America

Police stopped 49-year-old Ethel Hylton at Houston's Hobby Airport and told her she was under arrest because a drug dog had scratched at her luggage. Agents searched her bags and strip-searched her, but they found no drugs. They did find $39,110 in cash, money she had received from an insurance settlement and her life savings; accumulated through over 20 years of work as a hotel housekeeper and hospital janitor. Ethel Hylton completely documented where she got the money and was never charged with a crime. But the police kept her money anyway. Nearly four years later, she is still trying to get her money back.

Ethel Hylton is just one of a large and growing list of Americans – now numbering in the hundreds of thousands – who have been victimized by civil asset forfeiture. Under civil asset forfeiture, everything you own can be legally taken away even if you are never convicted of a crime.

Suspicion of offenses which, if proven in court, might result in a $200 fine or probation, are being used to justify seizure of tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of property. Totally innocent Americans are losing their cars, homes and businesses, based on the claims of anonymous informants that illegal transactions took place on their property. Once property is seized, it is virtually impossible to get it back.

Property is now being seized in every state and from every social group. Seizures include pocket money confiscated from public-housing residents in Florida; cars taken away from men suspected of soliciting prostitutes in Oregon; and homes taken away from ordinary, middle class Americans whose teenage children are accused of selling a few joints of marijuana. No person and no property is immune from seizure. You could be the next victim. Here are some examples:

• In Washington, DC, police stop black men on the streets in poor areas of the city, and "routinely confiscate small amounts of cash and jewelry." Most confiscated property is not even recorded by police departments. "Resident Ben Davis calls it 'robbery with a badge.'" [USA Today, 5/18/92.]

• In Iowa, "a woman accused of shoplifting a $25 sweater had her $18,000 car – specially equipped for her handicapped daughter - seized as the 'getaway vehicle.'" [USA Today, 5/18/92.]

• Detroit drug police raided a grocery store, but failed to find any drugs. After drug dogs reacted to three $1.00 bills in the cash register, the police seized $4,384 from cash registers and the store safe. According to the Pittsburgh Press, over 92% of all cash in circulation in the US now shows some drug residue.

• In Monmouth, New Jersey, Dr. David Disbrow was accused of practicing psychiatry without a license. His crime was providing counseling services from a spare bedroom in his mother's house. Counseling does not require a license in New Jersey. That didn't stop police from seizing virtually everything of value from his mother's home, totaling over $60,000. The forfeiture squad confiscated furniture, carpets, paintings, and even personal photographs.

• Kathy and Mark Schrama were arrested just before Christmas 1990 at their home in New Jersey. Kathy was charged with taking $500 worth of UPS packages from neighbors' porches. Mark was charged with receiving stolen goods. If found guilty, they might have paid a small fine and received probation. The day after their arrest, their house, cars and furniture were seized. Based upon mere accusation, $150,000 in property was confiscated, without trial or indictment. Police even took their clothing, eyeglasses, and Christmas presents for their 10-year-old son.

The incentive for government agencies to expand forfeiture is enormous. Agencies can easily seize property and they usually keep what they take. According to the Pittsburgh Press, 80% of seizure victims are never even charged with a crime. Law enforcement agencies often keep the best seized cars, watches and TVs for their "departments", and sell the rest.

How extensive are seizures in America today? The Washington Post has reported that the US Marshals Service alone had an inventory of over $1.4 billion in seized assets, including over 30,000 cars, boats, homes and businesses. Federal and state agencies seizing property now include the FBI, the DEA, the US Marshals Service, the Coast Guard, the IRS, local police, state highway patrols, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, FDA, and the Bureau of Land Management. Asset forfeiture is a growth industry. Seizures have increased from $27 million in 1986, to over $644 million in 1991 to over $2 billion today.

Civil asset forfeiture defines a new standard of justice in America; or more precisely, a new standard of injustice. Under civil seizure, property, not an individual is charged with an offense. Even if you are a totally innocent owner, the government can still confiscate your "guilty" property.

If government agents seize your property under civil asset forfeiture, you can forget about being innocent until proven guilty, due process of law, the right to an attorney, or even the right to trial. All of those rights only exist if you are charged with a criminal offense; that is, with an offense which could result in your imprisonment. If you (or your property) are accused of a civil offense (offenses which could not result in your imprisonment), the Supreme Court has ruled that you have no presumption of innocence, no right to an attorney, and no protection from double jeopardy.

Seizure occurs when government takes away your property. Forfeiture is when legal title is permanently transferred to the state. To get seized property returned, you have to fight the full resources of your state or federal government; sometimes both! You have to prove your property's "innocence" by documenting how you earned every cent used to pay for it. You have to prove that neither you nor any of your family members ever committed an illegal act involving the property.

To get a trial, you have to post a non-refundable "bond" of 10% of the value of your property. You have to pay attorney fees – ranging from $5,000 to over $100,000 – out of your own pocket. Money you pay your attorney is also subject to seizure (either before or after the trial) if the government alleges that those funds were "tainted." And you may be forced to go through trial after trial, because under civil seizure the Constitutional protection against "double jeopardy" doesn't apply. Once your property is seized, expect to spend years fighting government agencies and expect to be impoverished by legal fees – with no guarantee of winning – while the government keeps your car, home and bank account.

In fact, in a recent Supreme Court decision (Bennis v. Michigan), the Court said explicitly that innocent owners can be deprived of their property if it's used to facilitate a crime, even without the owner's knowledge or consent. That means you can now lose your home or business because of the action of employees, relatives, or guests, over whom you have absolutely no control.

Not only do police and prosecutors have the power to seize anything you own on the slightest pretext, they also have the incentive. The dirty little secret of the forfeiture racket is that police, prosecutors and judges can benefit personally by stealing your property.

Brenda Grantland – America's leading asset forfeiture defense attorney – gives these examples of government greed in her book "Your House Is Under Arrest":

• Suffolk County, New York. District Attorney James M. Catterton drives around in a BMW 735I that was seized from an alleged drug dealer. He spent $3,412 from the forfeiture fund for mechanical and body work, including $75 for pin-striping.

• Warren County, New Jersey. The assistant chief prosecutor drives a confiscated yellow Corvette.

• Little Compton, Rhode Island. The seven member police force received $3.8 million from the federal forfeiture fund, and spent it on such things as a new 23-foot boat with trailer, and new Pontiac Firebirds.

But that's just the tip of the iceberg. The head of one Los Angeles police forfeiture squad claims his group personally pocketed over $60 million in seized property.

Why do our courts tolerate these outrageous legalized thefts? Because they get their cut. It's completely legal for confiscated property to be used by police, prosecutors and judges, so long as it's for official business. In 1996, a federal district court even ruled that police can personally receive 25% of the value of any confiscated home, car, or business.

So, why do you put up with this? You all a bunch of pussies or what?

[Big Mac]

American government is out of control on all levels. I've gone on the record saying that we either need to restore Constitutional sanity and limited government, or we need to apologize to the Crown and beg to be readmitted as Englishmen. Then you can be PM.

[turtle777]

The US is in a really sad state of affairs.

I'm so glad I have dual citizenship. If this crap keeps coming, I'm out.
I'm already moving many of my assets abroad (albeit, I'm not rich or wealthy at all).

-t

[finboy]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

The US is in a really sad state of affairs.

I'm so glad I have dual citizenship. If this crap keeps coming, I'm out.
I'm already moving many of my assets abroad (albeit, I'm not rich or wealthy at all).

-t

My favorite Youtube of the week is the gun confiscation in and around New Orleans at Katrina. Law abiding citizens were disarmed and then had to get lawyers to get their guns back. That, my friends, is a little sh*tstorm waiting to happen. Can't see them trying that in Texas.

(In fact, the authorities here had that chance and didn't do it during Ike, maybe based on the high profile of the NO cases).

No solution for the confiscation of property except for people to fight back with attorneys. Eventually something might change, but I doubt it.

[BadKosh]

I guess waiting for the ACLU to do good is a waste of time.

[lpkmckenna]

The War on Drugs has been a disaster at every level, especially in terms of constitutional rights.

Of course, picking on America over rights when England has turned itself into IngSoc is pretty funny.

And the ACLU is one of the few bodies that stand between the US and complete tyranny.

[mattyb]

United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom asset forfeiture proceedings are initiated under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002. There are three types:

* confiscation proceedings following a criminal conviction;
* cash forfeiture proceedings, which take place (in England and Wales) in the Magistrates Court with a right of appeal to the Crown Court, having been brought by either the police or Customs.
* civil recovery proceedings, which under the 2002 Act as originally passed were only capable of being brought, in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, by the Assets Recovery Agency and, in Scotland by the Crown Office, but, following amendment by the Serious Crime Act 2007, are now capable of being brought by the Serious Organized Crime Agency, the Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales, the Director of the Serious Fraud Office, the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland and, in Scotland, by the Crown Office Serious Crime Act 2007, section 74 </ref>.

Neither cash proceedings nor proceedings for a civil recovery order require a prior criminal conviction.

[Doofy]

But we already know that the UK is a shithole.

It's actually quite hard for them to engage in asset forfeiture here - it reads much worse than it actually is.

[besson3c]

Most of those things sound like Police State sort of things... Just understand, if you want a hispanic witch hunt in Arizona and to be "tough on terror" that we, in a sense, invite police states. Maybe not according to those specific examples Doofy posted, but my point is you can't really have it both ways, namely "safety" and simultaneous freedom from the cops/state/federal agencies.

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Most of those things sound like Police State sort of things... Just understand, if you want a hispanic witch hunt in Arizona and to be "tough on terror" that we, in a sense, invite police states. Maybe not according to those specific examples Doofy posted, but my point is you can't really have it both ways, namely "safety" and simultaneous freedom from the cops/state/federal agencies.

I don't buy that.

There is no reason you can't have a safe country, liberties and a small government.

Right now, we have everything but that.

-t

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

I don't buy that.

There is no reason you can't have a safe country, liberties and a small government.

Right now, we have everything but that.

-t

But safety is relative. Just look at airport security alone. Is what you have to go through to get on a plane an example of liberty?

There is pressure to "crack down on terrorism", so naturally politicians oblige and may at times overreach. This occasional/frequent overreach is the result of "cracking down" on terrorism. If you want to be tough and super secure this is going to happen.

[ghporter]

Civil forfeiture "only affects bad guys and druggies." Or so most people think. Your posted story reveals the dirty truth about it though. I wrote a lot more, but I got angry and decided that my blood pressure didn't need that sort of negative stimulus, so I'll just say that some voters actually remember this sort of idiocy and take that knowledge to the polls. Because it's only by making lawmakers sit up and pay attention that we could possibly fix this really egregious wrong we've allowed ourselves to foist upon ourselves.

[Laminar]

I put up with it for all of the freedoms I enjoy.

[CreepDogg]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Civil forfeiture "only affects bad guys and druggies." Or so most people think. Your posted story reveals the dirty truth about it though. I wrote a lot more, but I got angry and decided that my blood pressure didn't need that sort of negative stimulus, so I'll just say that some voters actually remember this sort of idiocy and take that knowledge to the polls. Because it's only by making lawmakers sit up and pay attention that we could possibly fix this really egregious wrong we've allowed ourselves to foist upon ourselves.

Well put. People often approve of these kinds of laws by saying, 'Don't do anything wrong and you have nothing to worry about.' Because it sounds 'tough on crime'. What it really is is a way to circumvent due process by using civil proceedings instead of criminal. Absolute rubbish.

Another (much less severe, but much more pervasive) example of this is all the asinine traffic cameras that are going up everywhere. The camera catches you (well, actually not even you, but your car) doing something and mails you a ticket. There is no 'burden of proof' that you did anything wrong since it's really a civil case. People say the same thing about these cameras, basically 'Don't speed or run red lights and you have nothing to worry about' while the government circumvents due process. The a-holes that do this don't get my votes.

[CreepDogg]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I put up with it for all of the freedoms I enjoy.

I hate you for your freedoms.

[Wiskedjak]

This is a perfect example of what eventually happens to any policy with far-reaching powers and limited oversight that had promoters who said "don't worry, we'll only target X. If you're not guilty, you have nothing to worry about".

It's too bad that people forget about something like this when they're asked to support something like warrantless-wiretapping and out of control airport security.

[imitchellg5]

I don't put up with that, so I'm going to shout about it on the Internet like an American.

[lpkmckenna]

Originally Posted by creepdogg 

i hate you for your freedoms.

lol!!