Posted on 02/13/2018 10:09:35 AM PST by nickcarraway
Does Alabama permit “civil asset forfeiture” prior to a criminal conviction for the crime producing the assets to be forfeited?
If so, Alabama civil asset forfeiture doesn’t need to be gutted; it needs to have a stake driven through its heart.
Protecting their trough.
Simple adjustment: The proceeds must go to an organization in no way affiliated with the law enforcement or government organization enforcing the forfeiture. It would need others to ensure the innocent are not snared. For starters: If there is no CONVICTION of a HUMAN BEING, there can be no asset forfeiture.
They should definitely "gut" pre-conviction civil asset forfeiture.
Last time I checked we still had a Constitution and it still had a 4th Amendment.
I can’t speak about Alabama, but for the NYPD, seized assets can be deposited into their pension fund.
If so, Alabama civil asset forfeiture doesn’t need to be gutted; it needs to have a stake driven through its heart.
Correct. Due process is due process. There aren't supposed to be any shortcuts around the Constitution which make theft by law enforcement legal.
It should always err on the side of protecting the rights of the individual—even when it's "inconvenient" for law enforcement...
The thief protests.
L
AL.com = FAKE NEWS
AL.com = Liberal slants
All civil asset taking must be after a conviction and the trial must show the asset was probably purchased with illegal obtained money. Anything less is just theft under color of law.
Maybe these two should propose a new law where Alabama takes all property in the state, and people who can prove they are innocent of any crime can apply to have it returned.
anyone in favor of any form of this prior to a conviction is scum, a traitor and deserves to be beaten nearly to death with a ball peen hammer before being set on fore, the remains to be removed from the United States or its territories.
NO American can be in favor of this, in any way, shape of form; they are no countryman of mine and may they and their offspring be cursed forever.
Allowing the police to directly benefit from the taking of assets creates a clear conflict of interests.
This reform of the law is a much needed reform.
This is an absolute, shameful, despicable lie.
The "theory" sounds so wonderful, but in actual practice, civil asset forfeiture is an unsupportable Constitutional and legal monstrosity, and a moral and ethical obscenity. Law enforcement throughout the country, from the federal level down to the state and local, have been using it as a mechanism for legalized theft.
I believe perhaps the clever distinction trying to be made here is between “forfeit” and “seizure’. They can “seize” your property any time. It’s not considered “forfeited” until the person from whom it was “seized” has lost in the long, expensive, drawn out challenge. I could be wrong but...
Legislation like this is because Law enforcement agencies and prosecutors have abused the real intent of asset forfeiture laws.
Says the "Some Pigs Are More Equal Than Others" Chief of Revenue Collection Officers to the local Serfs.
Oh the horror, they might not be able to keep what they steal for themselves.
If I were King they would have to get a Conviction by Jury of 12 to seize anything.
That is a specious argument, mixing civil law with criminal law. They may call it "civil" asset forfeiture as they try to shrug off the limits placed on them by the Constitution, but make no mistake, "civil" asset forfeiture is part of a criminal proceeding. And no one should have their assets seized due to criminal activity unless they have been convicted of a crime.
I know it makes law enforcement's job more difficult but that is one of the effects of living in a free republic which limits governmental power.
Oh we should trust these creeps.
This illustrates that the corruption in law enforcement is widespread. It’s not just those at the top.
Let’s also officially legalize parallel construction too and go total police state. That’s a good crime fighting tool too.
Yes. All civil forfeiture is like that. The article is just a long list of lies. Civil forfeiture needs to be made explicitly illegal by Congress and ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
That this hasn’t happened despite the issue being in the news for many years is proof of the extreme corruption levels in modern America.
“Law enforcement and prosecutors can’t go after property unless it can be shown it was used in a crime...”
This is also part of the problem. Drive your car somewhere and get arrested? The police can seize your car and keep it even if the charges are dropped. That really happens too.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.