Asset forfeiture

One of the hugest abuses of our Constitution is Asset Forfeiture. See the link: https://www.yahoo.com/news/come-after-me-pennsylvania-pol-goes-off-on-gibbon-trump-in-profanity-laced-facebook-post-210232804.html

To be as crass as this so-called gentleman of the Upper House: Leach is an appropriate name for a Senator, don't you think? How about fixing the budget you oaf! Civil forfeiture allows law enforcement to seize — and then keep or sell — any property they allege is involved in a crime. Owners need not ever be arrested or convicted of a crime for their cash, cars, or even real estate to be taken away permanently by the government. It is, however, an incentive for all levels of law enforcement to violate the Constitution. Most people affected by this are not law breakers. Many are retirees or elderly living below the poverty line. Yet it gives those entrusted with our safety an incentive to "win" and not serve justice.

Forfeiture was originally presented as a way to cripple large-scale criminal enterprises by diverting their resources. But today, aided by deeply flawed federal and state laws, many police departments use forfeiture to benefit their bottom lines, making seizures motivated by profit rather than crime-fighting. For people whose property has been seized through civil asset forfeiture, legally regaining such property is notoriously difficult and expensive, with costs exceeding the value of the property. With the total value of property seized increasing every year, calls for reform are growing louder, and CLRP is at the forefront of organizations seeking to rein in the practice.

This link to a story in the Wash Po is typical and not the exception: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/11/how-the-dea-took-a-young-mans-life-savings-without-ever-charging-him-of-a-crime/?utm_term=.2e231ef55980

The most chilling aspect to this is in the cavalier comments from our law enforcement officials and the lack of acknowledgement from the DOJ: Once property has been seized, the burden of proof falls on the defendant to get it back -- even if the cops ultimately never charge them with a crime. "We don’t have to prove that the person is guilty," an Albuquerque DEA agent told the Journal. "It’s that the money is presumed to be guilty."

The "money" is "presumed to be guilty"! How faulty is that logic?

The Asset Forfeiture law is an intentional crippling tactic to help the government win regardless of merit, ethics, or even morals.

#government