- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: TPSO seizes $800K in cash
Posted on 11/20/15 at 4:35 pm to NYNolaguy1
Posted on 11/20/15 at 4:35 pm to NYNolaguy1
They can't get it from the government who steals it from you, so they skip the middle man and steal it themselves
0
Posted on 11/20/15 at 4:47 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
But I do think the fix will come from the legislature, which has been getting heat about this from across the country, from New Mexico to Oklahoma to Ohio. But there's always massive pushback from LEO because they don't want to lose the funding. Of course it's phrased as "we are losing a valuable tool in the fight against crime ...". Meanwhile you hear stories about parents getting their houses seized because little Johhny sold $40 worth of drugs out of it.
I have a tough time with this option because it goes against the constitution. The remedy for changing the existing law is to rule it unconstitutional. Also, I think there is most definitely a time and place for seizures. Of course we shouldn't be seizing a house because little Johnny sold $40 worth of drugs out of it.
But when a boat was specifically purchased and retrofitted, hidden compartments and all, to be used as a narcotics/weapons smuggling device, seizure law is a good option. Or if probable cause exists that a terrorist organization created a bank account on the proceeds of kidnapping ransoms (as an example), I'm ok with the seizure. But all and all, I think the civil forfeiture/seizure laws in the country need closer scrutiny and tighter guidelines.
quote:
Why not just tell your legislator you need more money and give up this unethical fight?
I have done this. As a person vested with broad seizure authority, I opt to decline 75% of the seizures that come across my desk. But in instances like the ones I mentioned above, I think it serves the public interest to seize these items. Oh, and I definitely scream for money.
On a side note, on the Federal side cash and assets seized do not end up in our office. If I seize $500,000 it does not go directly to my office budget. Hell, rarely does it even go to my agency's budget. There's a form called a DAG-71 that allows us to try and get it back for the agency at large, but that money never flows down to my office. It's not like if we seize jet skis, you'll see agents cruising the lake next week. Damn. I wish that were the case.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 4:53 pm to ClientNumber9
After say cash is used for evidence purposes during a trial, where does the cash go?
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:00 pm to rantfan
quote:
After say cash is used for evidence purposes during a trial, where does the cash go?
On the state/local side, I don't know. On the federal side, it goes into a giant pool called the Treasury Forfeiture Fund or routes through the DOJ's Asset Forfeiture Program for distribution. From there, federal agencies are allowed to make requests for needed equipment for the next Fiscal Year. So between the federal agencies, there may be $50M seized. From there, each agency makes thousands of requests from the field. A committee called the Treasury Executive Office for Asset Forfeiture decides which agency gets what.
So like I said, I have zero incentive to seize little Johnny's $10. It's not like I'm taking that money and buying a new MRAP with it.
ETA: The $50M is a random number for illustrative purposes. I have no idea what the total number of seized cash at the federal level is, though I suspect it's public record somewhere.
This post was edited on 11/20/15 at 5:08 pm
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:06 pm to ClientNumber9
quote:
But when a boat was specifically purchased and retrofitted, hidden compartments and all, to be used as a narcotics/weapons smuggling device, seizure law is a good option. Or if probable cause exists that a terrorist organization created a bank account on the proceeds of kidnapping ransoms (as an example), I'm ok with the seizure. But all and all, I think the civil forfeiture/seizure laws in the country need closer scrutiny and tighter guidelines.
And if that's how all seizures went, I would be more inclined to agree with you. Unfortunately a group of DA's and LEO got together and spoiled the pot for everybody.
There was a case in Tenaha Texas where a cop would pull over random cars and seize whatever valuable goods he found and charge the car owner with trumped up drug charges, even threatening to separate kids from parents. The solution? Sign over your rights to fight the seizure and no charges will be filed. It was a team effort between the local county DA and the police. LINK
quote:
In the East Texas town of Tenaha, the district attorney oversaw a particularly Dickensian operation: Local cops would stop out-of-town drivers on the flimsiest of pretexts to look for cash, DVD players, cell phones, anything of value. The DA would threaten drivers with criminal charges, even promising to have state authorities remove kids from parents unless they waived rights to the property.
A class-action lawsuit uncovered that the proceeds from this highway robbery—an estimated $3 million between 2006 and 2008—were paying for popcorn machines, donations to a local Baptist church and bonuses for law enforcement key to the operation. Meanwhile, the DA was handing out light sentences to those caught with drugs, or laundered money, in exchange for seizing their assets.
I just think it's stories like that can really grow distrust of LEO at a time when frankly they can't afford it. Parents house seized because of son's drug bust
I know equitable sharing means that on the fed side they only keep 20% of what they seize, but because it's federal, state law doesn't apply. I had read that some states were opting out of equitable sharing altogether, drawing the obvious attention of our fedgov. Ultimately I think that will be the future with CAF, even though as you pointed out there could be legitimate uses for it. Unfortunately it's far too easy to abuse as it stands.
This post was edited on 11/20/15 at 5:10 pm
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:13 pm to QuiteTheConundrum
quote:
Supreme Court has ruled that police are free to allow police dogs to smell around the car and do not have to have a warrant or permission to search to do so. Possible that they do not have to have probable cause either. Not sure though.
This is true but they have to already have them on hand, they can't make you wait around for them.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:18 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
And if that's how all seizures went, I would be more inclined to agree with you. Unfortunately a group of DA's and LEO got together and spoiled the pot for everybody.
And this is why I think SCOTUS needs to tighten it up. It generally goes like this:
1) Law enforcement is granted a needed new authority to enforce the law.
2) Over the coming years the new authority is put into practice, usually resulting in police exploiting the law and bleeding over to legal gray areas.
3) Defendants challenge in court and judges tighten, end altogether, constraint, or more clearly define as needed.
This process is much overdue here. (If you aren't familiar with the distinctions between CAFRA and non-CAFRA seizures, you should look into this. The authorities and lack of statues of limitations, right to counsel, etc will blow your hair back.)
Still, I've seen too many shitheads commit shithead crimes to want to end all CAF. I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
quote:
Unfortunately it's far too easy to abuse as it stands.
Common ground to agree on here for sure.
This post was edited on 11/20/15 at 5:22 pm
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:19 pm to SabiDojo
quote:
K-9's are a joke. They have amazing noses but they will "hit" on anything the officer wants them to.
K.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:36 pm to Slinky
K yourself.
He's 100% correct.
Police dog training is a complete joke.
He's 100% correct.
Police dog training is a complete joke.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 5:39 pm to logjamming
Yeah, except try to leave. Barney has a gun and a raddio.
"You all jes sit tight, you heah?"
"You all jes sit tight, you heah?"
Posted on 11/20/15 at 6:34 pm to VetteGuy
typical retarded arse backward country bumpkin cops. Didn't even realize they pulled over the decoy vehicle and the one carrying $8 Million in cash zoomed right on past their redneck bumbling asses.
you think it's a mistake that they were speeding while carrying that amount of money, and their stories didn't match?
you think it's a mistake that they were speeding while carrying that amount of money, and their stories didn't match?
This post was edited on 11/20/15 at 6:35 pm
Posted on 11/20/15 at 7:08 pm to DirtyMikeandtheBoys
Not bad.
I like it when they catch a guy with like 50# of weed with a "street value of $2M".
I guess if every seed germinates they are spot on.
I like it when they catch a guy with like 50# of weed with a "street value of $2M".
I guess if every seed germinates they are spot on.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 7:29 pm to ClientNumber9
If you can't stop Civil Asset Forfeiture because it "takes away a valuable LEO tool in the war on drugs," then why don't you change where the money goes. Perhaps it could be sent to the nearest school board or something.
LEO can have their "valuable tool", but profiting from that tool creates such an obvious conflict of interest.
I'm not directing this post directly to you btw, I just chose someone randomly.
LEO can have their "valuable tool", but profiting from that tool creates such an obvious conflict of interest.
I'm not directing this post directly to you btw, I just chose someone randomly.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 7:58 pm to VetteGuy
quote:
Police dog training is a complete joke.
It's completely absurd when you think about it. Using a goddamn dog to gather probable cause. Imagine your car getting tossed on the side of the road because a guy told you his dog smelled something...
Posted on 11/20/15 at 8:12 pm to Jim Rockford
Lesson today?
If you have $800K in your car, don't speed.
If you have $800K in your car, don't speed.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 8:31 pm to Barf
People tend to equate police dog training with dogs that are trained for explosives detection by the military.
The federal government has specific guidelines and protocols for these animals, the local yokels do none of this. False alerts are extremely common and any average lawyer can get a dog's probable cause dismissed. Of course, you never hear about the 1000s of time the dog is "wrong" b/c the hapless the motorist is just happy to be let go with a warning.
A dog's sense of smell is phenomenal, almost as strong as his want to please his master.
The federal government has specific guidelines and protocols for these animals, the local yokels do none of this. False alerts are extremely common and any average lawyer can get a dog's probable cause dismissed. Of course, you never hear about the 1000s of time the dog is "wrong" b/c the hapless the motorist is just happy to be let go with a warning.
A dog's sense of smell is phenomenal, almost as strong as his want to please his master.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 8:36 pm to Hammertime
quote:I wonder who the Sheriff is related to.
ROBERT---Tangipahoa Parish Sheriff Daniel Edwards
Posted on 11/20/15 at 8:39 pm to Hammertime
nm
This post was edited on 11/20/15 at 8:47 pm
Posted on 11/20/15 at 8:46 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
In other words, over time K9's just want to make their masters happy, not necessarily find drugs. So for every "hit", even unsuccessful, he got a treat
well, as bogus as that is, it matches the garbage defacto democracy to a T.
Posted on 11/20/15 at 9:33 pm to ClientNumber9
Every little dollar counts
Page 18 of 18
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News