Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We have allowed LE to steal our money with impunity. It will not stop until there is a public outcry to remove LE's power to steal our assets. This is one reason so many distrust and even hate LE.
-----------------------
How can you turn a lonely guy looking for a date into a predator looking for a victim? All you need is a computer and a cop. Thus we must hail Noah Pransky, an investigative reporter for WTSP in Tampa Bay, Florida, for exposing the way cops fish for men on adults-only dating sites and then arrest them for being child predators. When they're not.
One way the cops do this is by first pretending to be young ladies of legal age. Then, once they develop an online relationship with a guy, they "admit" that they are actually younger, but still really want to meet. Or they say that they are eager to meet the man, but will be bringing along a younger sibling. The men don't have to indicate any interest in dating the female they now think is younger, or in dating a legal lady's younger sibling. Merely continuing an online conversation is considered soliciting a minor, as is heading off to meet the "older" sibling who will have the "younger" sibling (both non existent, of course) with her.
Pransky found a "pattern of officer misconduct in an effort to boost arrest totals." In one case, a man repeatedly texted that he emphatically did not want to have sex with the 13-year-old sister his date would be bringing along. But "after hundreds of text messages the man agreed to have sex with both females, and was arrested upon arrival."
Why create "predators" who don't actually pose a threat to kids? As always: Follow the money. In fact, follow two sources:
1.) A man accused of looking for children online can have his property seized. The police may get to keep his stuff—even if charges are never actually filed:
I call foul on this one .. without sufficient probable cause reviewed by the d.a.... who has to elect to charge and prosecute.. and then the filter of a jury.. or judge which has to listen and render no case is going anywhere...
Several layers...
And then when convicted a forfeiture hearing again...
I call foul on this one .. without sufficient probable cause reviewed by the d.a.... who has to elect to charge and prosecute.. and then the filter of a jury.. or judge which has to listen and render no case is going anywhere...
Several layers...
And then when convicted a forfeiture hearing again...
Lots of legal process before anything happens
That is reality....
Property is taken before due process, often times requiring you to prove that no illicit means of were used to percure said assets.
It is really hard to prove you did not use illegal funds to buy something. Often times the lawyer fees are more than the items in question, so people don't even want to bother.
Property is taken before due process, often times requiring you to prove that no illicit means of were used to percure said assets.
It is really hard to prove you did not use illegal funds to buy something. Often times the lawyer fees are more than the items in question, so people don't even want to bother.
Civil forfeiture is unconstitutional.
True, but it appears to be a growing trend and not enough people are outraged. I think many just assume if LE takes your assets you must have been guilty.
Property is taken before due process, often times requiring you to prove that no illicit means of were used to percure said assets.
It is really hard to prove you did not use illegal funds to buy something. Often times the lawyer fees are more than the items in question, so people don't even want to bother.
Civil forfeiture is unconstitutional.
Yawn... untrue... I have done it many times
Unless there is a voluntary surrender... or a denial of ownership... and I'm going to seize it as fruits of the crime.. the paperwork is huge and the process lengthy ... usually a year or more... a judge reviews and signs off... and I have to provide substantial evidence of illegality for it to be turned over to the government... before all that there are multiple layers even departmentally I have to jump through
I did have a drug mule walk from 250k in cash saying it wasn't his and he had no knowledge of it... signing documents stating same
I'm sure the cartel was gentle on him
So... let's keep the invective accurate... its not like Miami vice shows
It has to be clearly linked to illegality
It needs to be worth money to the government in the end... or its not worth seizing...it has to pass multiple layers of scrutiny ... administratively and legally
I would love to seize more property from crooks.. reality..its not that easy
Yawn... untrue... I have done it many times
Unless there is a voluntary surrender... or a denial of ownership... and I'm going to seize it as fruits of the crime.. the paperwork is huge and the process lengthy ... usually a year or more... a judge reviews and signs off... and I have to provide substantial evidence of illegality for it to be turned over to the government... before all that there are multiple layers even departmentally I have to jump through
I did have a drug mule walk from 250k in cash saying it wasn't his and he had no knowledge of it... signing documents stating same
I'm sure the cartel was gentle on him
So... let's keep the invective accurate... its not like Miami vice shows
It has to be clearly linked to illegality
It needs to be worth money to the government in the end... or its not worth seizing...it has to pass multiple layers of scrutiny ... administratively and legally
I would love to seize more property from crooks.. reality..its not that easy
Yawn. Untrue.
"clearly linked to illegality" is meaningless. "clearly linked" in whose mind? LE? LE who will profit"? The fact of the matter is LE can steal assets from anyone they choose to and this has been shown over and over again. All they have to do is say they are suspicious. I can give you lots of links to real life situations.
LE should never have the authority to steal assets from anybody. Giving LE a financial incentive to take assets creates a dangerous environment where abuse of power is the likely outcome.
And it doesn't take a year for LE to seize assets. They can and do seize assets instantly. It then takes a year or more for an innocent person to get their assets back.
"clearly linked to illegality" is meaningless. "clearly linked" in whose mind? LE? LE who will profit"? The fact of the matter is LE can steal assets from anyone they choose to and this has been shown over and over again. All they have to do is say they are suspicious. I can give you lots of links to real life situations.
LE should never have the authority to steal assets from anybody. Giving LE a financial incentive to take assets creates a dangerous environment where abuse of power is the likely outcome.
And it doesn't take a year for LE to seize assets. They can and do seize assets instantly. It then takes a year or more for an innocent person to get their assets back.
I agree completely. This system has been abused time and time again. They also seize vehicles and impound them and even if your car is ordered released you still have to pay impound fees. Most times the fees are more than the car is worth. It is systematic theft under color of authority.
Yawn... untrue... I have done it many times
Unless there is a voluntary surrender... or a denial of ownership... and I'm going to seize it as fruits of the crime.. the paperwork is huge and the process lengthy ... usually a year or more... a judge reviews and signs off... and I have to provide substantial evidence of illegality for it to be turned over to the government... before all that there are multiple layers even departmentally I have to jump through
I did have a drug mule walk from 250k in cash saying it wasn't his and he had no knowledge of it... signing documents stating same
I'm sure the cartel was gentle on him
So... let's keep the invective accurate... its not like Miami vice shows
It has to be clearly linked to illegality
It needs to be worth money to the government in the end... or its not worth seizing...it has to pass multiple layers of scrutiny ... administratively and legally
I would love to seize more property from crooks.. reality..its not that easy
It's been going on for decades and not always legal or fair.
American law uses an innocent until proven guilty approach to everything EXCEPT forfeiture. Your "property can be deemed guilty" without you even being charged with an offense and the onus is upon you to prove the innocence of your property AT YOUR EXPENSE and by which time it has already been sold to fund a ski trip for the cops to Aspen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
