asset forfeiture

[broken ed]

Interesting story on asset forfeiture. This has been covered before in these threads, even by Bob Wells. This offers some perspective.

Defining What's Excessive In Police Property Seizures Remains Tricky

https://www.npr.org/2019/04/09/7104...ve-in-police-property-seizures-remains-tricky

There's an audio button in the upper - left of the page if you'd rather listen then read.

 

[WanderingRose]

I saw this yesterday, too.

What is reasonable will continue to be defined by case law, is my prediction, and good for this guy for standing his ground.

I hope he is able to recoup the costs of fighting this, which may then be some deterrent to arbitrary and capricious police actions in the future.

 

[Pleasant Travels]

Yeah, but until the individual officers have to pay out of their own pocket for their mistakes, nothing will change. As long as the government is held to pay, they just pay with more stolen dollars. Woopty doo! Let's go rob some more folks!

 

[Seminole Wind]

when "we the people" stand up and tell the government enough is enough, then things will change. making the "cop" pay wont change the underlying laws

dont shoot the messenger... ever heard that one. solid wisdom there

 

[B and C]

The only way to make the cop pay would be to change the laws.

 

[WanderingRose]

Correct.

If law enforcement acts within the law, and their rules/regulations, etc., they can’t be held personally liable for seizing that is later overturned by the courts.

I would be willing to bet, too, that these kinds of actions are not taken without approval of supervisors at least a couple of levels beyond a street officer.

Case law will likely rein this all in, is my prediction.

 

[MikeRuth]

first I will say I have been completely against this law since it's inception, It was clear that it would be misused.

Now If used as it should have been there would have been very few if any complaints but of course history proves that it is and has and will continue to be abused.

But I gotta say, this guy in the mentioned case is a IDIOT!!! selling Heroin to undercover cops is pretty freaking stupid.
Now with regards to the drug in case, Heroin, I have no problem with this dude loosing his ride, he's damn lucky he didn't spend anytime in a JAIL! Heroin is serious business and I don't care if it is a SMALL AMOUNT, it's still Heroin! We don't need that on our streets. I know the likely hood of ever eradicating it is probably zero, but no matter the person buying , selling or using, LOCK THEM UP!

 

[bullfrog]

Yet another reason to stay on dirt roads and avoid people with bad habits and the trouble they cause.

 

[Matlock]

Didn't read the link but I know a couple years ago my home state passed a law that requires a criminal conviction before law enforcement can confiscate property. We were one of a dozen states that undid a pretty lame law. If I remember right, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Nevada have a similar change and New Mexico and Nebraska have outlawed the practice entirely.
I'll check your link later, see how far off topic I am.