Wisconsin Cops Confiscate Families' Bail Money

[RevDisk]

isn't that what happened?  they got their day in court? and their cash back?


its always puzzled me why folks are so hell bent on getting folks outa jail who are likely gonna just go back after trial.   money is better spent on quality landsharking

The money was seized without a court order.  Yes, they got it back after proving their innocence.  That is not how our system is supposed to work

[MechAg94]

because cops can make up suspicions

if they have taped phonecalls what are they making up?

Was it seized solely on the phone calls?  The article mentioned several other things based on their interrogation of the family. 

[MechAg94]

The money was seized without a court order.  Yes, they got it back after proving their innocence.  That is not how our system is supposed to work

I guess I would like to see a higher standard of evidence/suspicion required before the property is seized.  I think a bit too much leeway is given. 

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

I guess I would like to see a higher standard of evidence/suspicion required before the property is seized.  I think a bit too much leeway is given. 

i can see that


i have also seen a guy get a 500 k bond posted in cash in 42 mins

[KD5NRH]

because you can't hit the same acct for more than limit in the same day, no matter how many atms you hit

The bank I used to work for would increase the limit upon request for 24 hours, after risk management had verified to their satisfaction that the caller was the account holder.  Additionally, this was several people chipping in, so they're not all pulling from one account and there's no legitimate reason to expect them to all use the same ATMs.

[MicroBalrog]

The money was seized without a court order.  Yes, they got it back after proving their innocence.  That is not how our system is supposed to work

This, with bells on it.

[Tallpine]

What if your money smells like earthworms           

[MechAg94]

The money was seized without a court order.  Yes, they got it back after proving their innocence.  That is not how our system is supposed to work

Maybe I am misreading this statement or interpreting it differently.  To me, this says the cops can do whatever the hell they want and no one cares as long as the courts fix it.  Any thoughts?

[Tallpine]

Maybe I am misreading this statement or interpreting it differently.  To me, this says the cops can do whatever the hell they want and no one cares as long as the courts fix it.  Any thoughts?

Correction: the cops can do whatever the hell they want and no one cares

[RevDisk]

Maybe I am misreading this statement or interpreting it differently.  To me, this says the cops can do whatever the hell they want and no one cares as long as the courts fix it.  Any thoughts?

Yes, this is the law when it comes to civil forfeiture. Except it's "probable cause" instead of "whatever the hell they want", which is close to but not quite the same. And no one cares even if the courts don't fix it.

Asset seizure and forfeiture was originally intended for the drug trade, but was extremely quickly expanded to many different things. Basically, pick all the "for the children" buzzwords and asset seizure can be applied. The laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Sometimes the money is split between the prosecution and the cops. Sometimes the cops transfer the goods to the feds, who kick them back a percentage in cash. The situation is obviously filled with official and unofficial corruption.  

It's a relatively "young" violation of civil liberties. Not legalized theft, per se, but the current iteration of asset seizure.

$27 million in 1985  
$644 million in 1991
>$1 billion in 1996
$3.1 billion in 2008


http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket/singlepage

That's starting to get to "actual money" even by Washington standards. DEA and other agencies also try to stay under the amounts that provide incentive to sue for the return of your cash. If the local cops seize a couple hundred bucks from your wallet, your nice but not high value older model sports car, etc. you're going to think long and hard before suing. If you win, you still pay for the lawyer and the local cops now have you on their radar. If you are smart, you move to another jurisdiction. If you lose, you still have to pay for your lawyer and often court fees. It's a binary "lose some" or "lose big" situation, regardless of guilt or innocence, as C&SD was quick not to point out.




This is not exactly idle to me. I went through this. I was off doing field exercises when my roommate called CQ that the cops were planning on towing my two cars. They were off the road, in a private lot. Township laws forbid cars with expired tags, regardless of whether they were on public or private property. I explained to the police that SSCRA took legal precedence over their township rules. Also, I could not renew the tags because I was in the middle of nowhere, with artillery rounds going outbound overhead. I'd face AWOL charges if I complied.

The young officer told me he would impound both if they didn't have new tags, and hung up. CO called JAG. JAG ignored the local cops, and called the magistrate. Magistrate called chief, with JAG on line. Magistrate used ... strong language. Magistrate was in the 82nd, and looked unkindly upon the situation. Chief apologized.

Cop tried anyways. I got the one car hidden in time. The other was impounded by the time a buddy could get the key and try to move it. Also, someone used a lockgun on my door, moved around items but did not steal anything. I know lockpicking. Someone with no training but relatively expensive equipment opened my door. It would not be local kids, and criminals would have stolen the easily fenced items.

It wasn't a nice car, and it would have exceeded the value to try to recover it. Even with a friendly magistrate.  I had to go to the locals to get finger printed for my Top Secret clearance immediately afterwards. Six officers "escorted" me during my fingerprinting. Thank the Gods one of the officers recognized me from college, and was a good police officer. He was a good cop back at the university, and still was a good cop. He did his best even after his supervisors made it clear crimes were not to be reported so university crime stats looked artificially good. As I said, honest and honorable man. So I made it out of the station without problem, after he subtly "vouched" for me.

I moved. Immediately. Sure, I searched the place top to bottom, but I know how easy it is to snowflake someone. Anything I couldn't pack in two days, I threw out. Anything I couldn't easily verify as sterile, I threw out. I was legally in the clear twelve ways to Sunday, but it did not matter. It was a fight I would lose, even if I had boatloads of cash. Which I didn't as a PFC. Respectfully, C&SD, there are a dozen if not hundred cases like mine every day. And that number will increase as laws become more and more draconian.

[roo_ster]

Yes, this is the law when it comes to civil forfeiture. Except it's "probable cause" instead of "whatever the hell they want", which is close to but not quite the same. And no one cares even if the courts don't fix it.

Asset seizure and forfeiture was originally intended for the drug trade, but was extremely quickly expanded to many different things. Basically, pick all the "for the children" buzzwords and asset seizure can be applied. The laws vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Sometimes the money is split between the prosecution and the cops. Sometimes the cops transfer the goods to the feds, who kick them back a percentage in cash. The situation is obviously filled with official and unofficial corruption.  

It's a relatively "young" violation of civil liberties. Not legalized theft, per se, but the current iteration of asset seizure.

$27 million in 1985  
$644 million in 1991
>$1 billion in 1996
$3.1 billion in 2008


http://reason.com/archives/2010/01/26/the-forfeiture-racket/singlepage

That's starting to get to "actual money" even by Washington standards. DEA and other agencies also try to stay under the amounts that provide incentive to sue for the return of your cash. If the local cops seize a couple hundred bucks from your wallet, your nice but not high value older model sports car, etc. you're going to think long and hard before suing. If you win, you still pay for the lawyer and the local cops now have you on their radar. If you are smart, you move to another jurisdiction. If you lose, you still have to pay for your lawyer and often court fees. It's a binary "lose some" or "lose big" situation, regardless of guilt or innocence, as C&SD was quick not to point out.




This is not exactly idle to me. I went through this. I was off doing field exercises when my roommate called CQ that the cops were planning on towing my two cars. They were off the road, in a private lot. Township laws forbid cars with expired tags, regardless of whether they were on public or private property. I explained to the police that SSCRA took legal precedence over their township rules. Also, I could not renew the tags because I was in the middle of nowhere, with artillery rounds going outbound overhead. I'd face AWOL charges if I complied.

The young officer told me he would impound both if they didn't have new tags, and hung up. CO called JAG. JAG ignored the local cops, and called the magistrate. Magistrate called chief, with JAG on line. Magistrate used ... strong language. Magistrate was in the 82nd, and looked unkindly upon the situation. Chief apologized.

Cop tried anyways. I got the one car hidden in time. The other was impounded by the time a buddy could get the key and try to move it. Also, someone used a lockgun on my door, moved around items but did not steal anything. I know lockpicking. Someone with no training but relatively expensive equipment opened my door. It would not be local kids, and criminals would have stolen the easily fenced items.

It wasn't a nice car, and it would have exceeded the value to try to recover it. Even with a friendly magistrate.  I had to go to the locals to get finger printed for my Top Secret clearance immediately afterwards. Six officers "escorted" me during my fingerprinting. Thank the Gods one of the officers recognized me from college, and was a good police officer. He was a good cop back at the university, and still was a good cop. He did his best even after his supervisors made it clear crimes were not to be reported so university crime stats looked artificially good. As I said, honest and honorable man. So I made it out of the station without problem, after he subtly "vouched" for me.

I moved. Immediately. Sure, I searched the place top to bottom, but I know how easy it is to snowflake someone. Anything I couldn't pack in two days, I threw out. Anything I couldn't easily verify as sterile, I threw out. I was legally in the clear twelve ways to Sunday, but it did not matter. It was a fight I would lose, even if I had boatloads of cash. Which I didn't as a PFC. Respectfully, C&SD, there are a dozen if not hundred cases like mine every day. And that number will increase as laws become more and more draconian.

Yeah, but that shi-ite* only happens to dirtbags, so either you're lying or a dirtbag.

Or something.



* Can't even refer to the non-sunni anymore, what with the language filter set to "slaughter."

[drewtam]

Respectfully, C&SD, there are a dozen if not hundred cases like mine every day. And that number will increase as laws become more and more draconian.

I believe it, based on every interaction I have ever had with police and the stories people I know are willing to tell.

The middle class is quietly growing distrust->resentment->hate for police. And one day its going to lead to one helluva preference cascade. That will be an interesting day. It will not be good for society and country.

It would be better to correct the situation now, before it gets out of hand.

[De Selby]

I believe it, based on every interaction I have ever had with police and the stories people I know are willing to tell.

The middle class is quietly growing distrust->resentment->hate for police. And one day its going to lead to one helluva preference cascade. That will be an interesting day. It will not be good for society and country.

It would be better to correct the situation now, before it gets out of hand.

Eh, with 75% of the population making less than $50,000 a year, there won't be a middle class to get angry with police.  And there are already millions of people in some phase of the justice system - 7.1 million says the Bureau of Justice Statistics.  That's a good chunk of the population which will have no say over police powers.

[MicroBalrog]

Eh, with 75% of the population making less than $50,000 a year, there won't be a middle class to get angry with police.

Only if we follow a very specific definition of middle-class.

[brimic]

What if your money smells like earthworms

Then you would obviously be guilty of unconventional banking, which I'm sure is covered under some federal statute.

[Tallpine]

Then you would obviously be guilty of unconventional banking, which I'm sure is covered under some federal statute.

There are various kinds of "banks" 

[mtnbkr]

Only if we follow a very specific definition of middle-class.

Yup.

There are many places in the US where $50k/year is a comfortable existence.  Maybe not "new car every 4yrs and big screen TVs in every room", but certainly not poverty either.

Chris

[Balog]

Yup.

There are many places in the US where $50k/year is a comfortable existence.  Maybe not "new car every 4yrs and big screen TVs in every room", but certainly not poverty either.

Chris

I live in (the suburbs of) a city with one of the highest costs of living in America. I know a number of folks making around about $50k a year, single income with kids, who are in no imaginable way impoverished. It's only by the ridiculously inflated standards of living that most Americans have that the majority of people below the "poverty line" are actually poor. "Oh no, I only have an iphone 3 and basic cable, I'm so poor!"

[De Selby]

Yup.

There are many places in the US where $50k/year is a comfortable existence.  Maybe not "new car every 4yrs and big screen TVs in every room", but certainly not poverty either.

Chris

Two things with this: 

1.  Inflation is rapidly making $50,000 a year a lot less than it was.

2. That's 75 percent under $50,000, not making $50,000. 

I don't expect that in five years time anyone will consider $50,000 to be a middle class existence, except if by middle class you mean vastly poorer than the other 25 percent of the country, but not starving.  There are plenty of low income earners and ex convicts who aren't starving, but we wouldn't describe them as middle class.

[AJ Dual]

Two things with this: 

1.  Inflation is rapidly making $50,000 a year a lot less than it was.

2. That's 75 percent under $50,000, not making $50,000. 

I don't expect that in five years time anyone will consider $50,000 to be a middle class existence, except if by middle class you mean vastly poorer than the other 25 percent of the country, but not starving.  There are plenty of low income earners and ex convicts who aren't starving, but we wouldn't describe them as middle class.

Considering that's generally all the fault of Socialist-leaning Keynesian economic policy, I'm not sure what your point is here.

[MechAg94]

The only way 50K a year will become actual poverty is if the idiots raise the minimum wage to 50K a year. 

I find it amusing that people seem to think that if you don't have a boat load of disposable income to spend on toys that you must be poor.

[SADShooter]

The only way 50K a year will become actual poverty is if the idiots raise the minimum wage to 50K a year. 

I find it amusing that people seem to think that if you don't have a boat load of disposable income to spend on toys that you must be poor.

This philosophy is essential, though, in an economy motivated by constant consumption.

[AJ Dual]

This philosophy is essential, though, in an economy motivated by constant consumption.

And don't forget that we live in a country where the "poverty line" itself is a moving, inflationary metric. Nor does it include non-cash forms of assistance that the non-poor pay for out of their own pockets.

[CNYCacher]

did the judge hear them?  i'm curious to know more

Did you hear them?  I'm curious as well.

[Monkeyleg]

DeSelby, my wife and I made less than $50K last year, but we're paying the mortgage on a pretty nice house (IMO), she took a couple of trips (by air) to WI, I took a trip to UT, AZ, & NV, and we bought a bunch of stuff. I bought a few pricey things, too. Eating well, too. And we don't even get food stamps.