we've touched on this topic before many times (often in drug-related threads). but seeing this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hytkAaoF2k

pissed me off again that local, state and federal authorities can take others' property without proof of guilt and with little oversight.

how does this stand up to constitutional challenge? and why would this not be incredibly popular legislation if introduced at the federal and/or state level?

there's a little movement towards positive action here:

Quote :

"In July 2008, 10 plaintiffs filed suit in federal court against Tenaha and Shelby county officials, alleging that police officers had stopped them without cause and unjustly seized their property. The plaintiffs allege that officers threatened them with criminal prosecution if they did not cooperate. Officials named in the suit included Tenaha mayor George Bowers, deputy city marshal Barry Washington (an African-American) and Shelby County district attorney Lynda Kay Russell. In March 2009, the plaintiff's attorney Timothy Garrigan announced that he would seek class-action status for the lawsuit, citing a large number of similar reports from other alleged victims. The police said that they will return at least one man's seized possessions, valued at around $8,500."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenaha,_Texas#Police_seizures_scandal


[Edited on March 30, 2010 at 9:36 PM. Reason : .]

3/30/2010 9:34:05 PM

how does it stand up to constitutional challenge? two answers:

1) the claim is that the property, not the person, is the defendant. Thus, the property has no right to a speedy trial, or even a trial. I think this is based on a federal law that allows LEOs to seize property that is suspected of being involved in or obtained through drug traffic.

2) no one in gov't really gives 2 shits about the Constitution anymore, really.


someone check the temperature in hell. sarijoul and I agree on something!

3/30/2010 9:45:44 PM

you can kill someone to obtain your inheritance early, and the cops won't claim this property through civil forfeiture. However, you earn $500 selling drugs and get caught, and the cops will take anything of value they find in your name. if someone can explain to me why this makes sense, I would like to hear it.

[Edited on March 30, 2010 at 9:56 PM. Reason : misworded]

3/30/2010 9:56:06 PM

Quote :

"and why would this not be incredibly popular legislation if introduced at the federal and/or state level?"

because it will be spun by political opponents as being "soft on crime"

3/31/2010 12:48:50 AM

Quote :

"you can kill someone to obtain your inheritance early, and the cops won't claim this property through civil forfeiture. However, you earn $500 are suspected of selling drugs and get caught and are not even charged, and the cops will take anything of value they find in your name. if someone can explain to me why this makes sense, I would like to hear it."

Fixed it.
(Yes, you do not even have to be charged with a crime.)

3/31/2010 3:12:27 AM

Quote :

"2) no one in gov't really gives 2 shits about the Constitution anymore, really."

3/31/2010 10:43:11 AM