Police Powers: Taking of property, papers, life, effects

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bon_Croix
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The wife of one of the local deputies told me specifically that they have quotas (which they hate ) but they don’t call them that, but promotions and assignments will be a function of filling quotas. Whether it’s stops or citations, they seem to exist unless I’m being lied to which I have no reason to believe.

I have no axe to grind. The only time I’ve been stopped was when I was going 18 mph over the posted speed limit and the cop just told me to slow down and have a good day.
 
I doubt due process allows any agency to use lawful evidence without a
conviction. The problem is with unlawful evidence; that brings us back to
entrapment. A good judge and/or D.A. will never allow a conviction with
unlawful evidence.

The problem is with this culture that exists in law enforcement that allows
such wrong behavior. Surely, a good Sherrif/police chief will make it a
priority to root out those amongst the ranks involved in perpetuating such
a culture.
 
Last edited:
Getting back to the Fourth Amendment thing, it seems that warrants are required for most searches. searches which are not done with a warrant are supposed to be “reasonable,” and it seems the courts have done a good job of ensuring this.

However, the civil forfeiture that goes on should definitely be done away with as it currently stands. I am astounded the ACLU has not taken this up. I am astounded that anyone thought this was even an idea, much less something that would fly in the US.
 
In the U.S., you also need what’s called “exigent circumstances” to do a search without a warrant, which basically means if you take the time to get a warrant what you’re looking for will be gone. The fun thing though is if you give permission to search, they can search, and sometimes the courts have monkeyed a bit with what counts as permission. Most legal types now advise to clearly state that you do not consent to any search, but you’re not going to impede the cop.

I definitely think civil forfeiture should go away (we already have criminal forfeiture laws). However it’s been very difficult to get these cases pushed to the supreme court. Plus you should only be able to forfeit property for your own wrongdoing - for example, a landlord should not forfeit a building used for drugs unless it can be proved that he was knowingly profiting from it.
 
Wait, what!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? They can take the landlord’s house??? Oh, my. How do they justify all this???
 
We don’t have quotas here that I have heard of, but they do check your activity log. They expect you to be doing something to make sure your working (which is reasonable). Be it tickets, answering calls, etc…

Secret knowledge here: unless your being a royal A-hole, most cops hate writing tickets. Most would rather give a warning especially if you don’t have a history. Unfortunately the day of just pulling someone over for a courtesy reminder that a light is out is over because of the paperwork. In my area you cant just pull someone without making paperwork and then they will ask you why you didn’t write a ticket if you saw an infraction… :confused:
 
In theory, it’s because the landlord ought to be aware of what tenants are doing and they want to make sure landlords aren’t profiting by running drug dens.

In practice, I’m pretty sure it’s just greed.
 
Is there a particular case you are referencing? Just curious.

In reality most cops and residents of a neighborhood can instantly tell you where the drug houses are. If I was a landlord I am pretty sure just from doing regular maintenance inspections that it would be immediately apparent that I was renting a house to a bunch of drug dealers…but I am not familiar with the particular case so I don’t want to make any assumptions.

I have no problem with the principle of criminal and civil forfeiture. I have heard some horror stories but they usually turn out to be bogus (not saying the ones who have heard of are, just speaking from my experience)
I think that if a criminal or civil forfeiture is done then that money, property, etc… should be held in custody pending the outcome of the case, at which time if they are exonerate it should be returned, or if convicted then officially seized and used accordingly.

My experience, at least where I live and work, is that everything is pretty darn well documented and not much that shouldn’t happen does happen, and that which does is found out pretty darn quick.
 
Last edited:
You can even keep an activity log of your neighbors. Some of them are almost always trying to economically benefit off of you in some way.
 
Bon_Croix said:
You can even keep an activity log of your neighbors. Some of them are almost always trying to economically benefit off of you in some way.
Click to expand...
What on earth are you talking about? Most people’s neighbors essentially ignore them, and the ones who don’t are usually trying to maintain mutually-beneficial ties. I have never had a neighbor who had a way to “economically benefit” off of me in any way, unless you count their kids constantly coming around to sell cookie dough to support their sports teams, LOL.
 
Have you heard of neighborhood watch? The white sign with the burgular dressed in black?

Dope dealers are making a load of cash off of their neighbor’s not keeping an activity log, and they probably aren’t reporting it on that IRS form titled “Cash received in business”.
 
Last edited:
Bon_Croix said:
Have you heard of neighborhood watch? The white sign with the burgular dressed in black?

Dope dealers are making a load of cash off of their neighbor’s not keeping an activity log, and they probably aren’t reporting it on that IRS form titled “Cash received in business”.
Click to expand...
I am only saying that if your neighbors are running a drug house, they are still not trying to benefit economically off of you, personally. Yes, they are hoping you will conveniently ignore that they’re running a criminal enterprise near you and possibly exposing you to all the dangers that entails. I am not arguing that we ought to ignore that! I’m only saying that even really bad neighbors are rarely trying to make anything off of us personally unless they’re sneaking into our back yards and stealing stuff.

The activity log would be kept if your neighbors were entertaining a suspicious host of visitors, which could mark them as running a business in an area that is zoned residential, at best, and as running a criminal enterprise that endangers their neighbors at worst. I’m not saying there is a thing wrong with keeping track of that.

Still, in most neighborhoods I’ve been in, most of my stay-at-home-mom watching has entailed watching to make certain that the service people are really service people. If someone I don’t recognize shows up to work on a neighbor’s home when the neighbor is gone, I would make note of the license plate and call the neighbor to make sure they are expecting someone. I don’t want to be giving a friendly wave to the guys emptying their house in broad daylight. (Even the “regular” who is there at an odd time is worth a call, since some neighbors with day jobs have to give their alarm code to their house-cleaners, which is a “near occasion of sin” for the house cleaners, let’s just say.)
 
Last edited:
Yes, they are benefitting off of you b/c the fact that they are your neighbors reduces the value of your property.

The log is needed as evidence for the police. Often times a simple complaint may not be enough for the police to undergo a full blown investigation. But, if an activity log documents what has been taking place (dates/times/who/where/what/etc…), then that can be what the police need.
 
Last edited:
No, the harm they could be doing to my property value doesn’t benefit them in any way, not any more than stray bullets coming from their house and hitting my windows would make them money instead of just costing me money to fix. My neighbors can cost me money without benefitting themselves.

Having said that, you are very right that anyone who believes their neighbors are into organized crime, selling drugs or even running a business in an area zoned residential will need to do the work of gathering evidence if they hope to see anything done about the problem. Law enforcement is going to work the hardest for the cases that have the best chance of a conviction, of course.
 
DarkLight said:
I definitely think civil forfeiture should go away (we already have criminal forfeiture laws). However it’s been very difficult to get these cases pushed to the supreme court. Plus you should only be able to forfeit property for your own wrongdoing - for example, a landlord should not forfeit a building used for drugs unless it can be proved that he was knowingly profiting from it.
Click to expand...
I thought that was where this thread was going when I read it. I totally agree. Anyone that thinks the government needs due process to grab property needs to read some of the horror stories surrounding civil forfeiture. Property is seized when charges are filed. Then when they are dropped, the person will likely be out the property with virtually no recourse, even if it was a total mistake.
 
pnewton said:
Then when they are dropped, the person will likely be out the property with virtually no recourse, even if it was a total mistake.
Click to expand...
Yup. And even if they get the property back, there’s no recourse for lost income or opportunities. For example, if your car gets taken, you can sue to get the car back, but you won’t get any compensation for not having access to your vehicle.
 
Well, I would say that due process includes what you are calling civil forfeiture. However, the question is whether preponderance of evidence is enough for the government to take property, obtain title, sell it, and / or use it.

What I am more interested in is the government’s taking of property but not giving notice to the owner’s of said property. And, the government’s use of agents/corporations to compel people to give up property (trick them). Example, a landman knocks on the door someone with a 6th grade education and gives them a 30 page contract to sign for some oil company to drill for oil. Yet, in the contract is legal language that allows for additional rights to the property beyond what a normal contract would have. Twenty years later, the oil company donates its rights to a mega non-profit corporation who then gives rights to the government. Here we have property passing from a private individual to a government controlled mega non-profit (a tentacle of the government b/c they have federal contracts and/or do business across several states).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top