NaturallyAspirated Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/world/national-security/sessions-greenlights-police-to-increase-seizures-of-cash-and-property-from-suspected-criminals/2017/07/19/3522a9ba-6c99-11e7-96ab-5f38140b38cc_story.html?__twitter_impression=true Neal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member steve from amherst Posted March 19, 2018 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted March 19, 2018 Guy proves again that he is a douchebag. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 I don't think police around here ever got the memo that they were barred from taking suspected criminals property. My nephew was in several scrapes with the law and the police had no problem seizing his car, that was actually in my brothers name. I was reading about one last year, long story short, a guy had his classic car stored at a relatives house where there was supposed drug activity by someone at the residence. Police seized his car and would not return it over forfeiture laws. In the meantime of him fighting to get his property back, his car shows up at police auction, The police had racked up considerable amount of miles on the car. They were out joy riding in his car. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Makes sense to look at protocol and safeguards that are supposed to be implemented for this. I’ll pass on a WAPO article that lists Holder as any champion of any legislation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cold War Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Zambroski said: Makes sense to look at protocol and safeguards that are supposed to be implemented for this. I’ll pass on a WAPO article that lists Holder as any champion of any legislation. I would like to see that. Unless there was some huge loop holes, I don't buy it. On the news they always have a huge display of the personal property they have seized from "suspected criminals" Edited March 19, 2018 by Cold War Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 4 minutes ago, Cold War said: I would like to see that. Unless there was some huge loop holes, I don't buy it. On the news they always have a huge display of the personal property they have seized from "suspected criminals" Yeah, there's gotta be a benchmark set for any reasonable "seizure" before charges, IMO. And I'm sure there is. Walk into a crack house and there is a room filled with distributable substance? Yep....take it all. Pull over a speeder with a pound or two of green? Nope. Charge then proper channels. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F3600 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 It would seem our Legislative friends have options to take this out of Sessions tool kit. Although it’s been around for a long time, so I suspect both sides like the capabilities. Administrative forfeiture is an in rem action that permits the federal seizing agency to forfeit the property without judicial involvement. The authority for a seizing agency to start an administrative forfeiture action is found in the Tariff Act of 1930, 19 U.S.C. § 1607. Property that can be administratively forfeited is: merchandise the importation of which is prohibited; a conveyance used to import, transport, or store a controlled substance; a monetary instrument; or other property that does not exceed $500,000 in value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.