Skip to comments.Crime Pays for Police
Posted on 10/11/2011 10:51:43 PM PDT by TenthAmendmentChampion
Russell and Patricia Caswell are a hard-working couple who may soon have their American Dream taken from them by the unholy alliance of local and federal law enforcement officials seeking to cash in on the Caswells property.
The Caswells face this dilemma even though they have broken no law and have spent their entire professional career working to combat crime with the very police force that now seeks to take their property though civil forfeiture. What is happening to Russ and Pat, however, is by no means an isolated instance and local law enforcements end-run around state laws designed to end the abuse of civil forfeiture should give anyone who owns Massachusetts property pause.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
The Hyatts and Hiltons of the world have enough dough to beat back any attempts like this to “civil forfeit” their properties — and so municipalities don’t even try. A small private operation? Not so much.
I wonder if there was somebody they forgot to pay off.
Profanity is just too weak...
If they’d had a million dollar mortgage, I bet this would not have happened. But they thought this was the United States.
There’s a request to join page on FB to support the Caswell family.
This is really short on facts.
On what pretense is the local government attempting to take property?
Drugs, Taxes, Domain? What?
Going to the linked news article, I see it appears to be about alleged use of the property to facilitate drug deals. Maybe the owners were believed to have winked too much — what hotel DOESN’T see drug crime sooner or later? Maybe they forgot to pay off the right people or make the right friends in the town.
30 arrests out of 125,000 room rentals over a 16 year period. It's sickening how corrupt law enforcement has become.
Is there any case law about situations like this? You gotta know that any hotel is going to see its share of the seedy who look perfectly proper at the check-in desk.
B) It's good form to get to the nut cut of the issue up front, to put it bluntly.
Put the issue up there. First.
So, it's a case of Federal Government taking property. (for whatever cause).
First, check the Constitution. Does it allow the Federal Government to take property, outside of 10 square miles for the seat of government and required military facilities?
Didn't think so.
We never gave government that power.
They are usurping powers they were not delegated.
Wars have been started over that.
It’s a little late for that... unless the rednecks take over Washington.
Jerks like me just need to keep pointing out that we didn't give the Feral Gooberment carte blanche. We tied them down with a Constitution.
And if they keep abrogating it, they own the fall-out.
And if you go murmur it in a well, guess what happens.
That's always a good place to start, law of the land, and all.
What do I have to lose besides a few years of wheezing?
No hostages for bad guys or government (who can tell, these days?).
Which doesn’t do squat in a court... trying to raise some information that might actually help these people in a practical world.
One would think a red-neck mite rile up a bit at that.
I’m sure this is going to be one of a thousand motions their attorneys will make, and will be amiss not to make. But they have to be careful not to annoy the grudge, er I mean judge too much because that closes off avenues.
I mean man, it’s easy enough for you as keyboard cowboy to braggadocio about what you’d do in their shoes. That’s moot, because they’re in their shoes — you aren’t.
Anyhow some practical freeper may know if this is unprecedented even in case law. If so that could make a quick end of it.
Send lawyers, guns, and money.
Fairly good advice. I can't improve on it, unless you want to send cannons and ships.
Because I can't fix it.
The lawyers do better with proper information. This is probably some little podunk place where the attorneys are great at DUI cases, not so good at huge national level questions like this.
And nobody’s asking you to fix it — simply get out of the way if you can’t help them.
I'm not in their shoes. And when I was, I was ugly about it. I hired the best gun I could get. And it worked.
Cost a butt-load of cash dollars.
And when I came out of it... pure as driven snow, as I was, when I went into the system....
I had learned a lot and lost ALL respect.
And so you wanna vomit-mouth all over someone else, monopolize a thread so to ever diminish the possibility of my request from being seen. I see.
The thread is getting bumped, right? Folks are seeing it?
BTTT works equally well for that purpose as does vomitizing over your own agony.
When all is lost, and there is no hope, burn it down!
Let the thieving “Law Enforcement” have only ashes.
I really hate thugs with badges!
Or does my story, and agony, that I vomit over (per your post) count less?
And are you seriously looking for legal advice on an internet forum? And grumpy at me because I'm taking away your air?
When I quit laughing, I'll finish this.
Then it is equally silly to take anything you say as meaningful.
How about linking to your vomit, surely you must have shared it some time in your garrulous past?
Just the same as you.
But it is important to bring the story to folk's attention.
coulda FOOLED me!
Go read the story. And act as you see fit.
Did you read the whole article? It seems that the couple have been helping the police enforce the law by using security cameras and a few other items to keep their motel as drug free as possible. The arrests that were made were a result of the couple calling the police. This is nothing more than cops seizing property in order to get the money simply because they can, and it is not the first time it has happened nor will it be the last until property seizure laws are taken off the books.
Yes, the irony struck me that, if the situation was as hinted by one of the commentors at the original article, then all the helpful calls to the police may have put the property afoul of some Assachusetts nuisance law. At which point said police give Holder a buzz and say, Would you like to make some hay out of this (and of course we’re glad to take our lion’s share cut)?
Ironically, this is giving owners of similar properties a very strong incentive to either turn a blind eye and let crime play out unmolested, or have private goons take care of trouble in a questionably legal manner.
Note you’re telling Tainan to do something you said you disdained yourself.
For goodness sakes try Linux. It’s much harder to get a virus from a flakey site that way.
“But civil forfeiture laws treat property owners worse than criminals. Criminals must be proven guilty before their property is taken. Once the government targets a property for civil forfeiture, however, the property owner must prove his innocence.”
It’s the way to strike fear into the souls of law abiding people so they can be controlled by the government.
There are a dump-truck size number of regulations about non-discrimination upon the lodging industry. This has resulted in innumerable law suits about civil rights and disability access discrimination. Given Massachusetts' reputation, I will bet that it is worse there.
If my assumption is correct, then this small, unaffiliated motel is caught between the horns of government. Just because the lodger looks like a tattooed gang member, you still have to rent to him. Yet, if you do, you have harbored an illegal activity [30/125,000 = .00024 or .024%] and thus are subject to civil forfeiture.
All hail the government that giveth and then taketh away. ... Wait, what did the government give in the first place? /sarc