Re: Asset Forfeiture

[sec@moscow.com]

> << I'm not a lawyer.. I don't understand what that all means.. all I know 
>  is that the US Spreme Court has ruled it is legal for a (any) govt to
>  take your possesions with only suspicion.  >>
> 
> A web search would disclose more more info, and likely more accurate info
> to boot.  I claim no expertise in the legalities of asset forfeiture.

neither do I. I'm just looking at teh Frima Faciea (one of three terms 
I remember from hight school law grin)

> In cases where the criminal is found guilty of a crime, it likely isn't
> difficult to seize the fruits of the crime.  In cases where the criminal

I have no problem with that....

> isn't found guilty or isn't prosecuted because of a lack of evidence, or
> some other reason, asset forfeiture gives Govt a vehicle  (no pun
> intended) by which they can still get at the fruits of the crime. 

uh what crime? if there not convicted,  they didn't do it.
in fact, where there aquited, they are considered to not have commited the crime.
so why are they being punished for not commiting a crime? see my point?

(all this is of course from the popint of view of The Law, having nothing to do with reason..)

> Specific legislation gives Govt the authority to seize specific types of
> property (vehicles, cash, etc) which were likely used in the criminal
> activity.  The legal system deals with the forfeiture as a civil matter
> against the property itself, with the corresponding reduction in the proof

you mean my CAR is a CITIZEN? it's aware and has rights???

> required - usually a preponderance of the evidence.  That gets around the
> difficulty which prevented a criminal conviction in the first place.  I
> believe the owner can defend against the forfeiture.

uh, I haven't been able to be able to find out IF you can get property back
after they have taken it, I SUSPECT thaty is varies depending on where

> Forfeiture could be a useful tool in the "War On Drugs" but it is subject
> to much abuse.  The stories of its abuse have been reported by many of the
> television news journals and such.  In many places the Govt (police dept
> or what-have-you) gets to keep the forfeited property.  Evidently the
> people in charge don't quite see the problem associated with making asset
> forfeiture an income-generating enterprise.

also makes it hard for you to afford a lawyer to defened yourself
(which I would suspect was the original cause)

> Please forgive me any errors in my explanation.  Do a web search on on
> "asset" and "forfeiture" and you'll find lots more.  Go.com gives my over
> 1300 hits.

well, like most other legal things, it depends on who is saying it 
and wether the Judge had enought coffee this morning..

Stan

"informed oppionions are the only ones that count"