"These are not a cases of Civil Forfeiture they are cases of outright theft Via criminals wearing suits (ie DA) and government issued costumes (ie police) aided/abetted by kangaroo courts staffed by court jesters (ie judges) who have completely forsworn their oaths of office in the name of expediency and profit."
Welcome to the land of the free and home of the brave.
Immoral
Laws
Michigan County Sued For Stealing Cars
From Innocent
Car Owners Via Civil Forfeiture
From the someone-did-some-crime-somewhere-maybe-so-we're-taking-your-stuff dept
A 1996 decision by the Michigan Supreme Court set the precedent for the widespread abuse of civil asset forfeiture in the state. The ruling said being an innocent owner of property seized is no defense and any forfeiture predicated on the illegal acts of others could result in the actual owner being deprived of property without violating their Constitutional rights.
A proposed class action has been filed challenging the city's forfeiture program which deprives the owners of their property due to other people's actions. The lawsuit [PDF], filed with the assistance of the Institute for Justice, tells just two of these 2,600 stories.
Both involve vehicle owners losing their cars because of someone else's alleged criminal acts -- even when no criminal charges were ever filed.
Melisa Ingram, a plaintiff in the lawsuit, knows the many abuses of Detroit’s system firsthand. Last summer her car was seized by Wayne County sheriff’s deputies after she lent it to her then-boyfriend so he could drive to a friend’s barbeque. Later that day, police pulled him over for slowing down in an area known for prostitution.
Although he was never charged with a crime, police nevertheless seized Melisa’s 2017 Ford Fusion.
Ingram paid $1,355 to get her car back. Six months later, she again loaned the vehicle to her boyfriend while she attended a barbecue.
As he was pulling away from the house, the same Wayne County deputies pulled him over and seized the car again, claiming the house he was leaving was supposedly connected to drugs or prostitution.
Just like the previous incident, the car was seized immediately
and no criminal charges were filed.
Ingram could not afford the $1,800 the police said she had to pay to release her car.
In July 2019, a man with whom Robert [Reeves] sometimes works asked him to visit a job site where he was clearing rubbish. The man had a skid-steer loader at the site and wanted to know if Robert knew how to operate it. Robert demonstrated how to use the equipment and the two men planned to meet the next day to begin their work.
Robert then drove to a nearby gas station and went inside to purchase a bottle of water. As he was leaving, officers surrounded him and demanded to know what he knew about a skid steer that was allegedly stolen from Home Depot. Robert knew nothing other than that the other man had rental paperwork from Home Depot, which was consistent with Robert’s understanding that the equipment had been rented.
After several hours of detention in the back of a police car, Robert was let go without being arrested.
He has not been charged with anything.
Police seized Robert’s Camaro on the spot, along with two cell phones and $2,280 that he had in his pocket.
These experiences aren't unique. They can't be. A single county doesn't seize more than 3 cars a day if it's not profitable. But unless the law is changed -- or state precedent overturned -- police will continue to take property from innocent owners because being innocent isn't enough to prevent a forfeiture. That's what the plaintiffs are hoping to change. The lawsuit seeks a ruling declaring the state's forfeiture policies unconstitutional -- a violation of the Fourth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It's an uphill fight, given state court precedent.
Federal challenge may finally upend the terrible laws that ruin state residents' lives and deprive them of their property without any finding of criminal wrongdoing.
DYI:
Make no mistake their district attorney [and supportive staff] plus the different law enforcement personnel know exactly what is going on. These laws have the spin off effect of corrupting all those involved in other areas as well. Creating a backdrop of almost anything goes of immoral behavior by the people who are required to serve and protect.
Las Cruces N.M. is an example where the police were attempting to push the seizure laws to acquire homes [obviously at zero cost] then rent them out to build a separate slush fund for the cops. Luckily when a new mayor was elected he wanted it stopped but the cops pushed back. This mayor fired all of the cops plus the DA and much of the supportive staff. At least that had a happy ending. Unfortunately most are all in taking full advantage of these immoral laws making this the land of the less and less free.
DYI
"These are not a cases of Civil Forfeiture they are cases of outright theft Via criminals wearing suits (ie DA) and government issued costumes (ie police) aided/abetted by kangaroo courts staffed by court jesters (ie judges) who have completely forsworn their oaths of office in the name of expediency and profit."
Welcome to the land of the free and home of the brave.
No comments:
Post a Comment