cannabisnews.com: Allowing Cops To Keep Loot Unconstitutional





Allowing Cops To Keep Loot Unconstitutional
Posted by CN Staff on December 12, 2002 at 17:24:25 PT
By John Curran,  Associated Press Writer
Source: Associated Press
New Jersey's practice of letting police and prosecutors keep the money and assets they seize is unconstitutional, a judge said in a case that could affect other states. The ruling, issued by Superior Court Judge Thomas G. Bowen in Salem County, puts a halt, for now, to a system criticized as bounty hunting. The practice gives law enforcement a stake in the cash, cars, computers and other property seized from criminals and suspects. 
"The decision will ensure that police and prosecutors make decisions on the basis of justice, not on the potential for profit," said winning attorney Scott Bullock. The state plans to appeal Wednesday's ruling, and will ask Bowen for a stay that would allow the continued distribution of seized assets, which amounted to nearly $32 million in a two-year period ending in 2000. "We believe it's a wrong decision," said John Hagerty, a spokesman for the state Division of Criminal Justice. "Civil and criminal forfeiture is a legitimate law enforcement tool that allows police and prosecutors to take the profit out of crime." The case started with a sheriff's deputy whose son was caught selling marijuana out of her 1990 Ford Thunderbird. Carol Thomas, 45, of Millville, who was never charged, said she didn't know her 17-year-old son had used it to drive to drug deals. He pleaded guilty and was fined and sentenced to house arrest. But the state filed a complaint against the car _ titled State of New Jersey v. One 1990 Ford Thunderbird _ and seized it, even though no drugs were found in it and it wasn't actually used in the deals. She sued to get it back and after it was returned, she filed suit against the state, challenging the constitutionality of civil forfeiture statutes. Her case caught the attention of the Institute for Justice, a libertarian Washington, D.C., law firm that champions individuals' rights, which took up her cause. Bullock, in oral arguments last month, told Bowen that law enforcement agencies use the proceeds to pay for office furniture, computer equipment, expenses and, in one case, a golf outing, improperly influencing their decisions about which cases to pursue. The state, meanwhile, argued that taking the profit out of crime was the whole point of the law in the first place. The judge agreed with Thomas' lawyer, stating in his opinion that the seizures give law enforcement "financial interests which are not remote as to escape the taint of impermissible bias in enforcement of the laws." David Smith, an Alexandria, Va., attorney active in civil forfeiture cases, said the ruling would have an impact beyond New Jersey. About 25 states share the loot from civil forfeitures with law enforcement, he said. This was the first court case to challenge the legality of that practice, according to Smith. "This will have a tremendous impact outside of New Jersey," he said. "This will go at least as high as the state Supreme Court, and if they agree with the judge, that's likely to be persuasive to other state Supreme Courts." Thomas, who now works as a dog groomer, couldn't be reached for comment on Thursday. Her home telephone was not answered. Complete Title: Allowing Cops To Keep Seized Loot is UnconstitutionalSource: Associated Press Author: John Curran,  Associated Press WriterPublished: December 12, 2002Copyright: 2002 Associated Press Related Article & Web Site:FEARhttp://www.fear.org/Big Brother Takes the T-Bird Awayhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread14732.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #12 posted by The C-I-R-C-L-E on December 13, 2002 at 14:20:58 PT
Who would have known they meant it literally?
"We believe it's a wrong decision," said John Hagerty, a spokesman for the state Division of Criminal Justice. "Civil and criminal forfeiture is a legitimate law enforcement tool that allows police and prosecutors to TAKE THE PROFIT out of crime."the message from the cops: Thanks for the hard work, dealers, we'll take that profit, thanks...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by charmed quark on December 13, 2002 at 08:48:57 PT:
Many, many things wrong with forfeiture laws
In addition to bypassing due process, the other thing that gets me about the current forfeiture laws is that they allow punishments that do not fit the crime. Publically, official says that the laws are an attack on the profits of criminals. But most of these laws don't require that the police show that the property being forfeited was gained through illegal activities. Most allow forfeiture if the property was simply somehow used in a crime. So, if you grow a cannabis plant in your house, they can forfeit your whole house even though you didn't purchase it with illegal profits. This allows open ended punishment.I was pleased and surprised by the NJ ruling.-Pete
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by mayan on December 13, 2002 at 04:48:15 PT
pigs
"Carol Thomas, 45, of Millville, who was never charged, said she didn't know her 17-year-old son had used it to drive to drug deals. He pleaded guilty and was fined and sentenced to house arrest. But the state filed a complaint against the car _ titled State of New Jersey v. One 1990 Ford Thunderbird _ and seized it, even though no drugs were found in it and it wasn't actually used in the deals."If no drugs were found in the car and it wasn't actually used in the deals then how was forfeiture ever an issue? Even if it was used in the deals how does that justify seizing the mother's car? It's double-jeopardy pure and simple. The fascist pigs have no understanding of The Constitution, and they wonder why we call them pigs? Someone here said something that made a lot of sense, something to the effect; "They're not dumb because they're cops...they're cops because they're dumb." Who would want to be a pig besides an intellectually bankrupt,insecure,fascist control-freak? What a bunch of losers.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by FoM on December 12, 2002 at 23:27:31 PT
Thanks BGreen
I'll sure see if I can find some tomorrow. I am done now for the day. I found the article from the LA Weekly and wanted to get it posted so I'm up late again. I think I'm thru now! I hope so! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by BGreen on December 12, 2002 at 23:15:20 PT
Zicam is a miracle for colds
I've never used anything that helped get rid of colds like this before. I didn't believe it would work, but my wife and I have used it for 3 years whenever we feel a cold coming on, and the colds never lasts for more than 3 days and NEVER get as bad as before we started using it.I don't get paid for this, I just believe in it.
Zicam Cold Relief
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by p4me on December 12, 2002 at 22:08:53 PT
I want to sue a tree
There is this tree that hangs over my property line and I would like to sue it. Could the governments lawyers advise me how to serve the papers? Just how insane can laws go when they can sue inanimate objects. If that tree drops a limb on me can I press criminal charges for assault? I demand you arrest that tree officer.It is shear insanity?1
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on December 12, 2002 at 21:30:19 PT
BGreen
No rest for the weary. That is so true. No time to retire to much to do. One of my favorite people was Mother Teresa. She cared for people who were sick and did what she could to make them comfortable but she always stood her ground too. I remember someone was asking her if she ever took money from anyone that was questionable to help her people and she said I take money from anyone who wishes to give me any to help my people. She also said that wherever the money came from she considered it a gift from God. She was strong willed but compassionate. No one pushed her into a corner because she wouldn't allow them to do that. We need more Mother Teresas. Lots of them and maybe we could change the world for the better. I'm getting a cold so I'm calling it a day soon. I didn't find anything in the WP or the NYT tonight but will look a little more then get some rest and try to shake this cold before it gets me down. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by BGreen on December 12, 2002 at 20:10:31 PT
Oh, Gee, thanks
I was planning on retiring after this. LOLMy problem is that I feel so much compassion for the suffering of others that I tend to share their suffering. That takes an emotional toll that is sometimes hard to bear. I cry when they cry, yell when they yell, and hurt when they hurt.That's what I believe being a Christian is all about, but it sure is hard to handle sometimes.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by FoM on December 12, 2002 at 19:53:49 PT
BGreen
No it isn't fair. There are so many things in life that aren't fair though. We need to do our best to help bring change when we have the ability. That way we can at least say we tried. As soon as we in life solve or bring change to an injustice there is another injustice that needs help and off we go to help there too. That's how I think. I remember a friend from an old chat named Honeybud. She said that when the laws are changed against marijuana she had plenty of worthy causes to keep her more then busy. An activist must be a certain type of person. I feel very similarly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by BGreen on December 12, 2002 at 19:12:30 PT
They NEVER steal the property of THEIVES
If you rob a store or a person, you should lose your stuff. It never happens. They only confiscate what they can prove is stolen or what the accused CAN'T prove they bought. It's obvious their money comes from illegal activity, but if DRUGS aren't involved, you walk WITH all your stuff.It just isn't fair.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by FoM on December 12, 2002 at 18:42:22 PT
BGreen
That's a scary thought but you are probably right. Taking people's property is what fuels them to go after people. Take the money out of it and the war on some drugs would be slowed down very quickly.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by BGreen on December 12, 2002 at 18:31:49 PT
The US Supreme Court will strike this down
faster than you can say "Bush is evil."TAKING the property without due process is CLEARLY prohibited by the Constitution, but that document has been made the equivalent of CharminŽ brand toilet tissue by the 9 fools who rule and lie for life.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment