# Yet another Civil Forfeiture abuse case......



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

How police took $53,000 from a Christian band, an orphanage and a church........

"And at some point, they brought out a drug-sniffing dog, which alerted on the car. That's when they found the cash, according to the deputy's affidavit."

"*Despite the positive alert* from the drug-sniffing dog, *no drugs, paraphernalia or weapons were found. *Just the cash." (Funny how the dog "found" drugs.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...church-in-omaha-and-an-orphanage-in-thailand/


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Cait43 said:


> How police took $53,000 from a Christian band, an orphanage and a church........
> 
> "And at some point, they brought out a drug-sniffing dog, which alerted on the car. That's when they found the cash, according to the deputy's affidavit."
> 
> ...


It's not all that uncommon for drugs to be found on cash. Truth of the matter, you probably have cash in your wallet right now with trace elements of drugs on it.

Cash is more bacteria laden than toilet seats. It's nasty stuff actually.

It there was a mass quantity of cash, there most likely was enough drug residue on it for the dog to alert.

Just sayin.............:watching:

BTW.....I'm *NOT* endorsing Civil Forfeiture in any way, shape, form or fashion.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> ...It there was a mass quantity of cash, there most likely was enough drug residue on it for the dog to alert...


...And even if there was no drug residue at all on the money, the dog-handler cop also knows how to signal the dog to do a false alert.
How friendly are the people of Muskogee to "other" people, for instance Burmese guys with thick accents? Not very, I imagine.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> It's not all that uncommon for drugs to be found on cash. Truth of the matter, you probably have cash in your wallet right now with trace elements of drugs on it.
> 
> Cash is more bacteria laden than toilet seats. It's nasty stuff actually.
> 
> ...


Please send me all your dirty bacteria laden money. I will protect you from the germs by laundering it and spending it.
You're welcome. (Just doing my Civic Duty)


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

BackyardCowboy said:


> Please send me all your dirty bacteria laden money. I will protect you from the germs by laundering it and spending it.
> You're welcome. (Just doing my Civic Duty)


You are aware that money laundering is illegal.......right?


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

According to the update, the victim's money was returned to him. 

"All's well that ends well". :watching:

BTW......doesn't anyone check their vehicle's brake / tail lights anymore? A little preventative maintenance can go a long ways........and avoid over-zealous cops as well.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> ...And even if there was no drug residue at all on the money, the dog-handler cop also knows how to signal the dog to do a false alert.
> How friendly are the people of Muskogee to "other" people, for instance Burmese guys with thick accents? Not very, I imagine.


Why all the negativity?

We both know something like that would never happen..............:smt083


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

You all need more faith in your fellow man A 12 ga. with 10 rounds and a 1911a1 with 2 spare mags. to start should do.


----------



## BackyardCowboy (Aug 27, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> You are aware that money laundering is illegal.......right?


That's why it pays so well.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

BackyardCowboy said:


> That's why it pays so well.


True.....but the people you have to deal with can be a bit of a real pain if they don't get their way.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> According to the update, the victim's money was returned to him.
> 
> "All's well that ends well". :watching:


At what cost in time and money to get their money back that should not have been taken in the first place........


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Cait43 said:


> At what cost in time and money to get their money back that should not have been taken in the first place........


Law enforcement, just like our country, is not perfect. That being the case, I still prefer this country and it's LE over any other in the world.

I could get on a soapbox and give it a go, but that's just not my style.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Cait43 said:


> At what cost in time and money to get their money back that should not have been taken in the first place........


The supposed intent of a civil-court case, a suit for damages arising from misbehavior or malfeasance (a "tort"), is to make the injured party whole again, as he was before anything went wrong. Of course, this never happens. It can't. Merely having been injured, even if not physically (_e.g._, by wrongful arrest), is traumatic and leads to permanent damage.
Even if the case is won, and even if state law holds that the injured party is due reimbursement for all costs, there are still unreimbursable losses. In the case of malfeasant appropriation of money by a police agency, there is at least the loss of personal time, loss of the money's use, and also loss of any interest it could have generated.



paratrooper said:


> Law enforcement, just like our country, is not perfect...


Yes, of course. But that does not forgive the injustice, and the immorality, of "policing for profit" at the expense of the innocent.

These cases are not occasional happenings, nor are they errors. They are purposely perpetrated upon people who do not deserve the trauma, in order that the state, county, municipality, or merely the township may accrue cash for desirable "goodies."
The police force openly operates with the expectation that the innocent persons upon whom they descend like wolves will live too far away, and will not have the resources, to fight the unjust and immoral appropriation of their money.

An "imperfect" police agency makes errors, as do we all.
But these are not errors, and, therefore, cannot be dismissed as merely mistakes made by a humanly-imperfect system.
Indeed, instead they are crimes in the truest sense, committed with malice aforethought, and with illicit profit as their motive.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Interview your border agents, interview the DEA . ARMCHAIR QUARTERBACKING is for the inexperienced who could never make the team or have very little knowledge or experience ,,,except from the journalistic point of view. Very sad


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> The supposed intent of a civil-court case, a suit for damages arising from misbehavior or malfeasance (a "tort"), is to make the injured party whole again, as he was before anything went wrong. Of course, this never happens. It can't. Merely having been injured, even if not physically (_e.g._, by wrongful arrest), is traumatic and leads to permanent damage.
> Even if the case is won, and even if state law holds that the injured party is due reimbursement for all costs, there are still unreimbursable losses. In the case of malfeasant appropriation of money by a police agency, there is at least the loss of personal time, loss of the money's use, and also loss of any interest it could have generated.
> 
> Yes, of course. But that does not forgive the injustice, and the immorality, of "policing for profit" at the expense of the innocent.
> ...


This could be said of any profession known to man.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> ...An "imperfect" police agency makes errors, as do we all.
> But these are not errors, and, therefore, cannot be dismissed as merely mistakes made by a humanly-imperfect system.
> Indeed, instead they are crimes in the truest sense, committed with malice aforethought, and with illicit profit as their motive.





paratrooper said:


> This could be said of any profession known to man.


While that is true, the police must be held to a higher standard than most other professions.
Why? Because they are the ones who are permitted to decide, _without any input from you_, whether or not to destructively interfere in your life.
Therefore, they have an absolute duty to be as fair and as honest as is humanly possible, and their management has the duty to oversee and enforce this fairness and honesty.

When the police act unfairly and dishonestly, nobody is safe and nobody's life is secure. Quite the opposite.
Abuse of power is a serious, civilization-threatening situation.
Institutional abuse of power, for instance civil forfeiture, is the worst case of all because the victim has little or no recourse, either immediately or in the long term.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> While that is true, the police must be held to a higher standard than most other professions.
> Why? Because they are the ones who are permitted to decide, _without any input from you_, whether or not to destructively interfere in your life.
> Therefore, they have an absolute duty to be as fair and as honest as is humanly possible, and their management has the duty to oversee and enforce this fairness and honesty.
> 
> ...


Same goes for lawyers and judges. Both can and do hold your future in their hands. They too, need to be held to a higher level.

I'll always be the 1st in line to say and admit, there are far too many bad cops in the ranks. But, the number of good cops far, far and away, out number the bad ones. So much so, it's not even a close comparison.

As I've stated in the past, it's just as easy to be a good cop, as it is to be a bad one. Actually, it's far easier to be a good cop, than it is to be a bad one. Being a bad cop takes much more work and effort, and sooner or later, it will catch up to you and take a hunk out of your hide.

There is no simple and easy solution, as long as humans continue to be cops. We are inherently flawed from birth, and only continue to get worse as we age.

Greed, power, and lust, will always be the downfall of us all.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> ...I'll always be the 1st in line to say and admit, there are far too many bad cops in the ranks...


Bad cops? That's not the issue here.
The civil-forfeiture problem has nothing to do with the personal morals of the individual cop, good or bad.
The problem is institutional, and comes down from the top. Police management dictates how the individual cop will behave, and bad or dishonest management has the power to turn a good cop into a cop who works as if he were a bad cop.
Civil forfeiture is, of itself, immoral, dishonest, and, in my way of thinking, also unconstitutional. A department, the management of which operates to accrue gain from civil-forfeiture activity, turns its good cops into bad ones against their will.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> Bad cops? That's not the issue here.
> The civil-forfeiture problem has nothing to do with the personal morals of the individual cop, good or bad.
> The problem is institutional, and comes down from the top. Police management dictates how the individual cop will behave, and bad or dishonest management has the power to turn a good cop into a cop who works as if he were a bad cop.
> Civil forfeiture is, of itself, immoral, dishonest, and, in my way of thinking, also unconstitutional. A department, the management of which operates to accrue gain from civil-forfeiture activity, turns its good cops into bad ones against their will.


A bad cop can and does use laws, rules, policy and regulation to his/her benefit at times, and interprets them as he/she sees fit, and applies them accordingly.

Notice, I said bad cops _in the ranks_. That includes police management as well.

There are situations and circumstances where Civil Forfeiture is a legitimate process and works quite well. I can't paint it with a broad brush though, and I would never try.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> ...There are situations and circumstances where Civil Forfeiture is a legitimate process and works quite well...


With due apologies, I gotta challenge you on that.
Civil forfeiture is appropriation without due process, without a hearing, and without recourse. It is, in truth, an illegal taking.

If you know of situations in which civil forfeiture accomplished a legitimate, moral, and legal end, I wish that you would either detail one case for me, or link me to the details of such a case. I just don't believe it, and can't believe it until I see some sort of proof.


----------



## pic (Nov 14, 2009)

Convicted Madoff aides face forfeiture rulings


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

pic said:


> Convicted Madoff aides face forfeiture rulings


Note that the headline states: "_Convicted_ Madoff Aides..."
The key word here is "_convicted_." That means that due process was exercised. A court order pertaining to only this case was obtained, _subsequent to the conviction_.

In the civil forfeiture cases being discussed here, there never is due process. There is never a hearing, much less a trial and a judgement. There is only a taking, based only upon suspicion...and sometimes, not even upon that.
Further, the motivation isn't to stop crime, but rather merely to gain goodies.
And, worse, in the name of stopping crime, the police who do this are themselves committing a crime.

_Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?_ (Who polices the police?)


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> With due apologies, I gotta challenge you on that.
> Civil forfeiture is appropriation without due process, without a hearing, and without recourse. It is, in truth, an illegal taking.
> 
> If you know of situations in which civil forfeiture accomplished a legitimate, moral, and legal end, I wish that you would either detail one case for me, or link me to the details of such a case. I just don't believe it, and can't believe it until I see some sort of proof.


I suspect that no matter what I post, you will have something to counter it with. Although my actual hands-on experience is limited, I am aware of situations where it was entirely appropriate and legitimate. Whether or not they were moral in nature, would depend upon who you spoke to and what the actual circumstances were.

I suppose that we're just going to have to agree......to disagree on this one. To continue to beat on a dead horse would serve no actual purpose. It's not like it's going to rise up and go somewhere. :smt033


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

paratrooper said:


> ...To continue to beat on a dead horse would serve no actual purpose. It's not like it's going to rise up and go somewhere. :smt033


...Well, maybe to the knackers? Or the glue factory? :yawinkle:


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Oklahoma governor signs civil asset forfeiture legislation | KFOR.com


----------



## high pockets (Apr 25, 2011)

$53,000 meant for charities returned to man after seizure; DA drops charges
$53,000 meant for charities returned to man after seizure; DA drops charges | KFOR.com


----------

