What are police thoughts on Civil asset forfeiture

Discussion in 'Cop Talk' started by Buffalo11, Feb 12, 2017.

  1. Buffalo11

    Buffalo11

    Messages:
    415
    Likes Received:
    415
    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2016
    I'm pretty curious about how the police around the country feel about civil asset forfeiture. What better place to ask than here?

    Constitutional? Moral? Should the practice continue?
     
  2. collim1

    collim1

    Messages:
    13,870
    Likes Received:
    12,513
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    For us it has been more trouble than it's worth
     

  3. Mayhem like Me

    Mayhem like Me Semper Paratus

    Messages:
    27,637
    Likes Received:
    22,440
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2001
    Location:
    outer rim
    It's a civil remedy ask the lawyers that thought it up
     
    Ohio Cop likes this.
  4. Sam Spade

    Sam Spade Staff Member Lifetime Member

    Messages:
    18,480
    Likes Received:
    12,205
    Joined:
    May 4, 2003
    I don't see why you should be able to keep the fruits or instruments of a crime. Even if you weren't the one who committed the crime.
     
    Newcop761 likes this.
  5. Patchman

    Patchman Florist

    Messages:
    19,853
    Likes Received:
    6,471
    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2008
    Location:
    Land of Flora, Fauna & Merriweather
    After the revolution was won, loyalists' properties were confiscated, often at the points of bayonets.
     
  6. Lt. Donn

    Lt. Donn PSO Survivor. currently in NW Georgia

    Messages:
    9,488
    Likes Received:
    20,793
    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2012
    Location:
    NW Georgia
    In many jurisdictions AF has become a Big Business...in the agency I retired from, there were several "dedicated" personnel who only worked on these cases...they brought in big $ to the agency. Originally begun by the feds ( I think) as a deterrent to crime, it spread quickly to agencies who recognized the $ potential. Several subsequent court challenges have narrowed the scope of the programs and there is a fair amount of "sharing" between agencies during large multi-jurisdictional cases. The practice is alive and well and being used effectively throughout the US.
    Personally, I agree with the program...so long as it is administered ethically...if you don't do the crime, then you have nothing to fear from AF...just one old cop's opinion...
     
  7. msu_grad_121

    msu_grad_121 BOOSH

    Messages:
    4,012
    Likes Received:
    1,229
    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2009
    Location:
    NW Burbs
    We utilize it pretty regularly. I'm fine with it, since we can only seize for pretty serious crimes, or repeated violations of the same law. Where it becomes tricky (from my standpoint, at least) is that State's Attorneys and/or judges refusing to allow us to seize a "higher end" car or piece of equipment for the EXACT same crime they have allowed us to seize a piece of junk for. It feels prejudicial from where I'm sitting, but that's just me.

    In short, I'm perfectly fine with the practice, so long as it's done equally across the board.
     
    Newcop761 likes this.
  8. SPDSNYPR

    SPDSNYPR Zippy's Friend.

    Messages:
    6,662
    Likes Received:
    181
    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2006
    Location:
    OK, USA
    I think it odd that one would think that everyone thinks the same because they are the police. We are not the borg. Some are for it. Some are against it. Some don't care. Just remember this: resistance is futile.
     
  9. scottydl

    scottydl

    Messages:
    2,735
    Likes Received:
    134
    Joined:
    May 31, 2005
    Location:
    The Middle
    There will probably be lots of various opinions on it (even from a bunch of police officers) because all of our jurisdictions handle it differently. It's also a different ballgame whether it happens on the federal level, state level, county level, etc.

    In general, and having worked a good portion of my LE career in drug enforcement, I love the idea. Drug dealers don't really care if you take their drugs... they can always get more, and "losing" drug shipments is an expected cost of doing business. But since dealers' real motivation for drug dealing is amassing money & stuff, they HATE it when police take their "hard earned" money & stuff! Which means that I absolutely LOVE it! My job (when I worked those type of cases) was to interrupt their criminal lifestyle and make it non-fun.

    In my state, it's nearly impossible to misuse the proceeds of asset forfeiture. Seized funds are required to go into a "drug account" that can only be used for justified future drug enforcement efforts... police vehicles (for that purpose), equipment, specific training, K9's, etc. It's not like the officers can go out and have steak dinners every week or buy Rolexes for everyone after seizing a trunkload of drug money.

    And paying for police expenditures with seized funds means the taxpayers aren't footing the bill. I have a hard time seeing the downside.
     
    msu_grad_121 likes this.
  10. merlynusn

    merlynusn

    Messages:
    4,487
    Likes Received:
    847
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Location:
    NC
    Im fine with taking drug dealers money. I have heard the horror stories of LE taking money from someone just because they have a "larger than normal" amount of cash on them. That I am not ok with.

    Where I used to work, many of the Hispanics did not have a bank account so everything was cash. So how coukd anyone take cash just because its cash. Also the "normal person in the US doesnt have $500 dollars so the fact that someone has more than that does not mean its from the proceeds of a crime.

    I only used it when I was already making an arrest for drugs. And my jurisdiction was very liberal and would do everything they could to not prosecute people. So the "I wasnt convicted of anything" is disingenuous.
     
    steveksux likes this.
  11. steveksux

    steveksux Massive Member

    Messages:
    24,743
    Likes Received:
    6,973
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2007
    As long as it's not abused, why not? Lower standard of proof since there's no conviction required? Why not, losing property is a lower standard of inconvenience than losing ones freedom.

    When they say "I pay your salary!" be sure to give them a big smile and say thank you! Being nice is important for community relations.

    Randy



    Sent from my XT1585 using Tapatalk
     
  12. Dukeboy01

    Dukeboy01 Pretty Ladies!

    Messages:
    4,304
    Likes Received:
    4,490
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2000
    Location:
    Lexington, KY
    The libertardian media tales of civil forfeiture abuse are cherry- picked for shock value and are in no way indicative of the reality, quelle surprise. Same way they cherry pick tales of no- knock raids gone wrong and examples of scary military surplus equipment being handed out to police departments.

    One might almost think that there was an agenda being pursued...
     
  13. texmex

    texmex

    Messages:
    2,067
    Likes Received:
    2,062
    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2004
    Location:
    Central Texas
    When someone is headed south on the interstate and they have over $50,000 in the vehicle, where do you think the money is going? Just the fact that they have the money is not the whole story. They are usually driving a vehicle they do not own. They don't know who owns the vehicle or the money. They don't even know how much money is in the vehicle. They usually say something like "a guy gave me $5000 to drive this Suburban from Chicago to Laredo and leave it at the Motel 6".

    For instance; (February 26, 2005) "Texas Department of Public Safety Highway Patrol troopers seized $2.8 million during a traffic stop Saturday morning in Wharton County. It's the third largest traffic-stop cash seizure in Department of Public Safety history. Just three weeks ago, in a separate bust, a DPS trooper seized $2.3 million in cash from an 18-wheeler that was southbound on U.S. 59 in Nacogdoches County."

    I don't think they were hauling $5,100,000 around because they didn't have a checking account.
     
  14. walkinguf61

    walkinguf61

    Messages:
    7,607
    Likes Received:
    7,205
    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2013
    Where I am, it was used to seize the cars of DWI as civil forfeiture. The problem was if the guy beat the case, they would still hold and sell the car.

    They stopped doing this to my knowledge but it was an overreach in my opinion.

    And we didn't want to do it because it was a a lot of paperwork and having to voucher the car and itemize everything in the car. It would take hours just to do that, let alone , process the original arrest
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2017
  15. CAcop

    CAcop

    Messages:
    30,566
    Likes Received:
    20,495
    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2002
    Location:
    California
    We don't use it as much as we used to just because of the time involved vs amounts seized.

    I don't have a problem with it as long as it is done properly.
     
  16. collim1

    collim1

    Messages:
    13,870
    Likes Received:
    12,513
    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2005
    Location:
    USA
    In my area it seemed to be done only when uncontested.

    So the crack house full of rats, termites, bed bugs and lice with a caved in ceiling and human turds in the corner no problem. But the Cadillac found being used dealing dope no way. It was registered to said dealers grandmother and we can't take her car.

    If it's not going to be done uniformly for all then I don't think it's worth doing.
     
    Mayhem like Me likes this.