Feds Sieze Land Rover

[Tallpine]

Thread necro. The woman in the OP, and several others, got their vehicles back:

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2015/06/12/feds-driven-to-admit-dozens-land-rover-seizures-were-wrong/?intcmp=features

With the help of a pro-bono lawyer.  Would have been a lost cause otherwise, even for a $60K vehicle.

At least the feds hadn't crushed them yet.

[Ben]

With the help of a pro-bono lawyer.  Would have been a lost cause otherwise, even for a $60K vehicle.

At least the feds hadn't crushed them yet.

This is true. As with so many other things, the government has people paid to come in every day and do stuff like this, and citizens have to pay to get justice.

If it were up to me, every time an enforcement agency did something like this, or asset forfeiture, or what have you, and were found to be in the wrong, whether malicious or even out of ignorance, their budget would be cut by 10%. Might make them think twice the next time they freeze somebody's bank account if they realize that forty or so "mistakes" would effectively put them out of business. I'd really like to see it applied to agencies like the EPA and IRS.

[Scout26]

The process is the punishment.

[roo_ster]

The process is the punishment.

This.

Also i think recompense to those citizens who are not convicted is a fine idea.

[Hawkmoon]

If it were up to me, every time an enforcement agency did something like this, or asset forfeiture, or what have you, and were found to be in the wrong, whether malicious or even out of ignorance, their budget would be cut by 10%.

Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.

IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.

Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."

[Ben]

Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.

IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.

Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."

Point taken, and as my previous posts on the subjects indicate, I am 100% in agreement with you that both of them need to go. :)

However, while bad laws exist, there should be significant penalties for their misuse.

On a positive note, it seems more and more states are passing laws against forfeited assets being converted for the use of the agencies that took them. Until there is a federal law however, it's not going to help much, since all local LE agencies have to do is partner with fed LE as the lead agency, and they can split the profits.

On loser pays, I'm generally in favor of that as well. Except that when it comes to government, taxpayers end up being the losers when the government loses. For that matter, more often than not, we end up being the losers when the government wins.

[Tallpine]

Point taken, and as my previous posts on the subjects indicate, I am 100% in agreement with you that both of them need to go. :)

However, while bad laws exist, there should be significant penalties for their misuse.

On a positive note, it seems more and more states are passing laws against forfeited assets being converted for the use of the agencies that took them. Until there is a federal law however, it's not going to help much, since all local LE agencies have to do is partner with fed LE as the lead agency, and they can split the profits.

On loser pays, I'm generally in favor of that as well. Except that when it comes to government, taxpayers end up being the losers when the government loses. For that matter, more often than not, we end up being the losers when the government wins.

Rope is cheap and gravity is free.

[brimic]

Not good enough for asset forfeiture. Asset forfeiture is nothing but theft under color of law. Remember, with asset forfeiture the government seizes the assets before any conviction, usually before any charges have even been filed, and often before the victim even knows he/she is under suspicion. I cannot reconcile that with the (purportedly) clear language of the Fourth Amendment.

IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.

Ditto for no-knock and so-called "knock and announce" warrant "services."

Whenever any LEO who gets shot while performing an asset forfeiture or no knock raid, it should be unprosecutable because they were shot while in commission of an armed robbery. Further, LEOs committing an asset forfeiture or no knock warrant should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

[Firethorn]

IMHO, asset forfeiture should simply not be allowed. Period.

I recently did a write up on what I think the next constitutional amendment should be, and guess what made the list?

Then again, I already think it's against the constitution because they're depriving people of their property without conviction(due process) or compensation(eminent domain).

[KD5NRH]

Also i think recompense to those citizens who are not convicted is a fine idea.

Yup.  What would it cost to rent that model Land Rover at the regular daily rate for a year?