- 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: Alabama tries to gut asset forfeiture, response from law enforcement is predictable
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:01 pm to SlowFlowPro
It's just so damn insulting that their two biggest gripes are the two things people hate about CAF the most.
1
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:03 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Sure you hear about an erroneous case here and there, but at the end of the day..is it not the same for most laws in the USA?
How many of those 500 were with merit?
If you had to be convicted of a crime first, all of them would be with merit. That's the point.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:04 pm to slackster
quote:
It's just so damn insulting that their two biggest gripes are the two things people hate about CAF the most.
Its sad and disheartening that they think police will only pursue criminals if it benefits them financially. Thats the most disturbing part of that article. Protect and serve- if they get their money.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:05 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
What incentive would local police and sheriffs have to invest manpower, resources and time in these operations if they don't receive proceeds to cover their costs?
Ah, so it isn’t about the “greater good” or “public safety” or anything like that.
Gotcha.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:07 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
I dont know. But a good metric would be how many of those 500 resulted in criminal charges?
My guess is far less than 500.
Then you have to ask, how many of those went uncontested due to financial reasons and not merit?
Keep in mind they can seize money you would use to fight it in court. No money = no lawyer = losing case
Fair enough, but you're talking 250 times/yr in a city the size of Philadelphia? The population is 1.5 million people. That's .01%, assuming all the residents of Philly are innocent, non drug dealers getting fricked by the government.
I'll take a success rate of 99.99% by the government any day.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:10 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
I'll take a success rate of 99.99% by the government any day.
That's not how any of this works.
If you were required to be guilty of a crime before your assets could be seized, the "success rate" would be 100%. The status quo allows for all kinds of abuses.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:11 pm to ThatMakesSense
Yeah that’s exactly a correct conclusion.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:14 pm to NYNolaguy1
ACAB
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:15 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
ThatMakesSense
And winner for "Not living up to screen name" is...
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:16 pm to slackster
quote:
That's not how any of this works.
If you were required to be guilty of a crime before your assets could be seized, the "success rate" would be 100%. The status quo allows for all kinds of abuses
Right, innocence presumed before guilt.
Should the law just allow someone with millions of dollars, gained through the very same illegal activities they are being charged, to procure high quality or representation?
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:16 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
I'll take a success rate of 99.99% by the government any day.
I like to think our founders would have disagreed. "Better 100 guilty walk free than one innocent person be found guilty" is a sentiment that I guess is losing traction quickly.
Besides, from what these guys are saying, it was always about the money rather than if they were actually guilty. Why go after them if the police cant get a cut of profit?
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:17 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Fair enough, but you're talking 250 times/yr in a city the size of Philadelphia? The population is 1.5 million people. That's .01%, assuming all the residents of Philly are innocent, non drug dealers getting fricked by the government.
I'll take a success rate of 99.99% by the government any day.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:18 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Should the law just allow someone with millions of dollars, gained through the very same illegal activities they are being charged, to procure high quality or representation?
Yes, yes it should.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:20 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Should the law just allow someone with millions of dollars, gained through the very same illegal activities they are being charged, to procure high quality or representation?
Everyone deserves quality counsel, regardless of charge. What you are charged with should have absolutely no bearing on the quality of legal representation you receive.
An example- did you know John Adams (not a crown loyalist) defended in court the British soldiers who killed the colonists of the Boston Massacre?
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:20 pm to slackster
quote:
Yes, yes it should
Ok. By your logic only rich people should have the right to get away with crimes?
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:21 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Ok. By your logic only rich people should have the right to get away with crimes?
I'm going to need your help connecting my logic to that statement.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:21 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Law enforcement uses civil asset forfeiture only to go after criminals
How is that possible when the assets are already forfeited before the person is proven guilty in a court of law......
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:21 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Fair enough, but you're talking 250 times/yr in a city the size of Philadelphia?
Right...so that's 1 city, in 1 state. And not even the most egregious one.
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:22 pm to ThatMakesSense
quote:
Ok. By your logic only rich people should have the right to get away with crimes?
Isn't that kind of how we do things now...more or less?
Posted on 2/12/18 at 3:23 pm to NYNolaguy1
quote:
Everyone deserves quality counsel, regardless of charge. What you are charged with should have absolutely no bearing on the quality of legal representation you receive.
That's a nice dream you live in.
quote:
An example- did you know John Adams (not a crown loyalist) defended in court the British soldiers who killed the colonists of the Boston Massacre
No, I didn't. There was also 2.5 million people living in the USA in 1775, so, it's not like their were fricking advertisements on horse carriages for lawyers and shite.
Page 3 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News