Asset forfeiture butt-fuckery

[draco664]

Link

Imagine you own a million-dollar piece of property free and clear, but then the federal government and local law enforcement agents announce that they are going to take it from you, not compensate you one dime, and then use the money they get from selling your land to pad their budgets—all this even though you have never so much as been accused of a crime, let alone convicted of one.

That is the nightmare Russ Caswell and his family is now facing in Tewksbury, Mass., where they stand to lose the family-operated motel they have owned for two generations.

The authorities who want to pad their budgets feel they can take the family's motel and sell it - because some of the guests who stayed there have been arrested for crimes in the past.

Land of the free.

[Panacea]

Yeah, the abatement laws. My local area is starting to use them more aggressively, but in the local case the places are well known drug markets, very run down and dangerous.

We don' have all the facts in the case you cite. But if true, very scary and absolutely reprehensible.

[mikoyan29]

Why don't they pick on someone who has offshore accounts in say the Caymans or Switzerland?

[MadMike]

Why don't they pick on someone who has offshore accounts in say the Caymans or Switzerland?

Because those people are rich, and have lawyers. They can fight back. These government asshole are bullies, and bullies don't like to pick on people who can fight back.

[Greenday]

If they aren't going to pay them for it, I suggest using the phrase "You can take it when you pry it from my dead cold fingers."

[bara]

I would imagine that even taking such measures to remove criminal elements ultimately just causes the criminals to move.

A building is just a building, if you want to get rid of crime you have to get rid of the criminals.

In my area at least, the highest drug use, drug selling, and other more serious crimes such as rape, murder, armed robbery are all in government housing. Who gets the abatement checks then?

[HYHYBT]

Well, if the crime moves elsewhere, that's good enough for their purposes.

[jackfaire]

I would imagine that even taking such measures to remove criminal elements ultimately just causes the criminals to move.

*Shrugs* They closed down a major transit center and it does seem to have had an effect on criminal activity in the area.

Most of it though was related to them congregating.

[Dips]

Local word about that place has always been that rooms can be rented by the hour, if you know what I mean.

I would say it would be more accurate to say that occasionaly they rent a room to legitimate guest.

If you look at the comments from the locals in that town, here is what they have to say:

http://tewksbury.patch.com/articles/...-take-my-motel

http://tewksbury.patch.com/articles/...#comments_list

http://tewksbury.patch.com/articles/...-motel-caswell

Nevertheless, most residents still don't support asset forfeiture in this case. There is the possibility that their hotel license could be yanked due to violations of local ordinances. They'd still own the land and be able to sell it or improve the property and re-apply for the license.

[HYHYBT]

Pulling a license seems much more reasonable all around than outright seizing the property... and is probably easier too.

[Zod]

If they aren't going to pay them for it, I suggest using the phrase "You can take it when you pry it from my dead cold fingers."

Would that work? Surely if you shot the first couple of police officers who tried to evict you, they'd just send more. Backed up with SWAT and possibly even FBI.

[draco664]

If they aren't going to pay them for it, I suggest using the phrase "You can take it when you pry it from my dead cold fingers."

Would that work? Surely if you shot the first couple of police officers who tried to evict you, they'd just send more. Backed up with SWAT and possibly even FBI.

Thus, the "cold dead fingers" part...

[Panacea]

I would imagine that even taking such measures to remove criminal elements ultimately just causes the criminals to move.

A building is just a building, if you want to get rid of crime you have to get rid of the criminals.

In my area at least, the highest drug use, drug selling, and other more serious crimes such as rape, murder, armed robbery are all in government housing. Who gets the abatement checks then?

High Point, NC has been using community policing to shut down open drug markets, and build relationships with the community that have seen crime go down and not reappear somewhere else. It can be done.

What they did was to identify and arrest the violent drug dealers. They identified and did a "call in" with the non-violent drug dealers and had a community sit down.

They were told 2 things: the community valued them, and would help them find other resources than dealing, and that the dealing must stop. Drug cases were put on hold, but would be prosecuted if they didn't clean up their acts.

It shut down the open air drug markets and reduced crime. Cities around the nation are duplicated this model, which High Point invented.

[draco664]

<voice="Professor Farnsworth"> Good News, Everyone! </voice>

A magistrate judge in Boston oversaw a bench trial over the forfeiture, and came the the conclusion that the Feds were going way beyond what was allowed. Essentially, that a man who has not even been charged with a crime shouldn't have his million dollar property taken away from him.

Dein’s ruling today pointed to several reasons why prosecutors didn’t have the right to seize the Motel Caswell:
- The government had identified only a limited number of qualified drug-related incidents, spread out over a 15-year period. None of the incidents — law enforcement officials eventually named 15 of them — involved Caswell or his employees, or even people that Caswell was familiar with.
- There were essentially no efforts to work with Caswell to reduce drug crimes at the property before prosecutors moved ahead with forfeiture proceedings in 2009
- There was no warning given to Caswell that the possibility of a property seizure even existed.
- Caswell, who lives next door to the motel with his family, and his employees took reasonable steps to secure the property and cooperate with police.

Link

[Panacea]

That's good news for property rights.

It's one thing to seize nuisance properties, but there should be a high bar to prove the place is a den of crime. Scattered arrests at a motel don't qualify; there isn't a motel or hotel in the world where a drug deal hasn't gone down.