Civil Forfeiture: Philadelphia Earns Millions By Seizing Cash And Homes From People Never Charged With A Crime (Penn: 2014)

[renault]

Your American blood should be boiling over this If not, then this country is doomed.

Philadelphia Earns Millions By Seizing Cash And Homes From People Never Charged With A Crime http://www.forbes.com/sites/institut...ction-lawsuit/

Chris Sourovelis has never had any trouble with the law or been accused of any crime. But that hasn’t stopped the City of Philadelphia from trying to take his home.

The Sourouvelis family, along with thousands of others in Philadelphia, is living a Kafkaesque nightmare: Their property is considered guilty; they must prove their innocence and the very prosecutors they’re fighting can profit from their misery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6MT_YLO5yg

[phillies2011]

Sounds bad. Though if it's making you so angry I can probably talk myself into getting on board.

[2e1m5a]

Another horrible component from the longest and costliest war in American history-the war on 'drugs'.

[mancat100]

It sounds blatantly unconstitutional, if what the article presents is true. I hope the city loses this case.

[renault]

Some more info. This can happen to anybody, innocent or not

Homeowners sue Philly D.A. over seizure of property

"I didn't do anything wrong. I didn't bother anybody," Sourovelis, 52, said in an interview Tuesday. "But we struggle from week to week not knowing what will happen."

Lawsuit: Philly 'ground zero' for forfeiture abuse

IMAGINE THAT government employees show up at your doorstep unannounced and force you out of your home - immediately. Utility workers suddenly pull up and shut off your gas and electric.

You haven't been charged with a crime, but you grab your belongings and go. You have no choice.

DN Editorial: Not-very-civil forfeiture

THERE ARE lots of ways to be Ferguson, Missouri. It doesn't necessarily require tear gas, smoke bombs lobbed at protesters or a heavily militarized police department. It doesn't even have to involve the shooting of a young unarmed black man, for no apparent reason - yes, another one.

[renault]

Philly DA sued over $5.8 million civil forfeiture

A class-action federal civil rights lawsuit, filed yesterday by the Institute for Justice, a Libertarian-oriented civil liberties union, and the Philadelphia civil liberties law firm of Kairys, Rudovsky, Messing and Feinberg, accuses the City of Philadelphia, Philadelphia Police Department and the Philadelphia District Attorney’s office of violating the civil rights of thousands of Philadelphians who have had their houses and other property confiscated by the Philadelphia District Attorney’s office, in many cases without any criminal charge being filed against them.

The complaint, filed yesterday in the United States Eastern District of Pennsylvania, accuses the D.A. of using “civil forfeiture” — a set of laws that allow law- enforcement officials to seize and keep property with a link, often vaguely defined, to illegal activity — to pad its budget at the expense of property owners by depriving them, the complaint alleges, of their constitutional rights to due process.

Civil Forfeiture in Philadelphia | Ronald D. Rotunda | Verdict | Legal Analysis and Commentary from Justia

The City of Brotherly Love is not so brotherly when it comes to civil forfeiture. Consider this case, which began in September of 1993. The police stopped Ossie Younge for a traffic infraction, speeding. Nothing unusual about that, but what was unusual (although not in Philadelphia) is that the police then seized $22,080 from his vehicle. The prosecutor never filed a petition to forfeit the money. At that proceeding, the prosecutor would have had to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the money was contraband. Instead, the police just seized it, which forced Mr. Younge to file suit seeking its return. The trial court rejected Mr. Younge’s petition. Its opinion repeatedly referred to Mr. Younge as the “defendant,” although he was the plaintiff in a civil case. Mr. Younge offered his testimony, his fiancée’s testimony, and various documents to show that he had lawful possession of the money.

He appealed. Pennsylvania, the appellate court observed, “offered no relevant evidence to the issue of who might have a superior claim to the seized cash, if not appellant.” It concluded that the lower court’s seizure of Mr. Younge’s money is “state-sanctioned theft.” Mr. Younge eventually won, but the gears of justice move slowly. It was not until November of 1995 (more than two years after the police seized the money) that the court ordered it returned.

[renault]

I don't know what upsets me more- the fact that government and swoop in and take your money and property without warrant, or the fact that so few of you seem to care

Law Lets I.R.S. Seize Accounts on Suspicion, No Crime Required

Carole Hinders, owner of a small Mexican restaurant, got a knock on the door from a pair of IRS agents, who told her that they had seized $33,000 from her checking account.

The article gives several other similar examples from around the country. One victim, after trying to prove his innocence, discovered that the government was not even interested in guilt or innocence. "They just want the money," he concluded.

Cash deposits of $10,000 or more trigger a 'suspicious activity report' that banks must pass on to the feds. But now according to the IRS, deposits under $1000 are also suspicious, because they might indicate an effort to avoid triggering a report.

The median amount seized is $34,000, and getting the money back can entail legal costs of $20,000 or more, so many just give up and let the government keep the money, according to the article.

[flip33]

Thanks for caring renault. This thread is in the Philadelphia forum where no one cares. It's as if the leaders of Philadelphia saw how apathetic the people are there and decided it was easy pickings.

My blood is boiling over this because it should be considered felony criminal behavior.

[Cnote11]

“If this can happen to me and my family, it can happen to anybody,” Sourovelis said.

Rubbish...

[renault]

Continuing my one-person crusade against this unAmerican, unconstitutional act by greedy law enforcement-


Police use department wish lists when deciding which assets to seize

The seminars offered police officers some useful tips on seizing property from suspected criminals. Don’t bother with jewelry (too hard to dispose of) and computers (“everybody’s got one already”), the experts counseled. Do go after flat screen TVs, cash and cars. Especially nice cars.

In one seminar, captured on video in September, Harry S. Connelly Jr., the city attorney of Las Cruces, N.M., called them “little goodies.” And then Mr. Connelly described how officers in his jurisdiction could not wait to seize one man’s “exotic vehicle” outside a local bar.

“A guy drives up in a 2008 Mercedes, brand new,” he explained. “Just so beautiful, I mean, the cops were undercover and they were just like ‘Ahhhh.’ And he gets out and he’s just reeking of alcohol. And it’s like, ‘Oh, my goodness, we can hardly wait.’ ”

So much for "to protect and serve".