America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 months ago by Gene363. 17 replies replies.
TSTSTT Gazette Vol 1 Ed 5 Civil Asset Forfeiture
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted: Wed, Jan 31 2024, 8:27 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
While sitting here relieving myself of yet another awesome burden I came across a story regarding the 2021 FBI of a safe deposit box vault in Beverly Hills.

Having had 15 years experience as a LEO one of the most troublesome procedures I’ve seen is that of Asset Forfeiture.

In my humble opinion it’s become nothing more than an unlawful way for municipalities to shore up budget shortfalls by STEALING that which does not belong to them. The law is written in such away that the person whose assets are stolen must bear the costs of proving they came into these assets legally. In many cases it’s one’s life savings so they don’t have the means to fight.

Then there are government agencies who shirk their responsibilities in search of a budget infusion. Case in point if one travels westbound on I-12 through Baton Rouge on any given day he will see 1-4 EBRSO units parked perpendicular to the roadway. When this first started I asked one of the interdiction guys who regularly posted there why the weren’t on the eastbound side since drugs generally flow up from Mexico through Texas and east across Louisiana to the final destination.

His answer to me was that I was correct but once the drugs were sold the money flows west across Louisiana on its way back to Mexico. Their priority wasn’t stopping the flow of drugs but stopping the money because the powers that be knew no one would claim the money because they couldn’t show a legal reason to be carrying such a large quantity of cash. So any money seized would except for a very small percentage eventually go to that agency.

If this is true then it’s long past the time to shut this process down.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#2 Posted: Wed, Jan 31 2024, 9:02 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
Abrignac wrote:
While sitting here relieving myself of yet another awesome burden I came across a story regarding the 2021 FBI of a safe deposit box vault in Beverly Hills.

Having had 15 years experience as a LEO one of the most troublesome procedures I’ve seen is that of Asset Forfeiture.

In my humble opinion it’s become nothing more than an unlawful way for municipalities to shore up budget shortfalls by STEALING that which does not belong to them. The law is written in such away that the person whose assets are stolen must bear the costs of proving they came into these assets legally. In many cases it’s one’s life savings so they don’t have the means to fight.

Then there are government agencies who shirk their responsibilities in search of a budget infusion. Case in point if one travels westbound on I-12 through Baton Rouge on any given day he will see 1-4 EBRSO units parked perpendicular to the roadway. When this first started I asked one of the interdiction guys who regularly posted there why the weren’t on the eastbound side since drugs generally flow up from Mexico through Texas and east across Louisiana to the final destination.

His answer to me was that I was correct but once the drugs were sold the money flows west across Louisiana on its way back to Mexico. Their priority wasn’t stopping the flow of drugs but stopping the money because the powers that be knew no one would claim the money because they couldn’t show a legal reason to be carrying such a large quantity of cash. So any money seized would except for a very small percentage eventually go to that agency.

If this is true then it’s long past the time to shut this process down.



Oh, its true!

http://www.cigarbid.com/...-Institution#post4746938

This isn't about a single "process". This is a continued agenda with a purpose. I'm not kidding when I state the FBI is the SS for the DNC. The proof is ALL there for anyone to see.

Delusional eh?


http://www.cigarbid.com/...en-Recession#post4705978

https://youtu.be/9OpIbiFmY60?si=VflV4G4UMxgS6xhr

Don't forget to wipe!
ZRX1200 Offline
#3 Posted: Wed, Jan 31 2024, 10:45 AM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,628
Our city is being sued over red light/speed cameras.

They changed the main drag last year, where it comes into the real heart of town it used to go from 30 mph to 25. It got changed to 30 to 20 right before the camera and no notice of the camera. The kicker is the camera had been there for 4 years but inactive and this is the only red light camera that is also a speed camera in the whole town.

One local business owner has a flashing yellow light and a warning sign posted ahead of it now. I bring this up because they’re desperate to keep funding PERS everywhere.
Abrignac Offline
#4 Posted: Wed, Jan 31 2024, 12:55 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Oh, its true!

http://www.cigarbid.com/...-Institution#post4746938

You’ll notice in the post directly beneath this one that you and I agree.

This isn't about a single "process". This is a continued agenda with a purpose. I'm not kidding when I state the FBI is the SS for the DNC. The proof is ALL there for anyone to see.

Delusional eh?

Delusional from the standpoint that if there are criminal statutes they are meaningless without an enforcement mechanism. For Federal criminal statutes that mechanism is the FBI. That does not mean I believe the FBI is above reproach. Quite the contrary. I personally believe that agency operates with way too little oversight.

http://www.cigarbid.com/...en-Recession#post4705978

https://youtu.be/9OpIbiFmY60?si=VflV4G4UMxgS6xhr

Don't forget to wipe!

FYI, since a new addition is normally published in the AM I usually shower right after I wipe.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#5 Posted: Thu, Feb 1 2024, 9:11 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
Abrignac wrote:
Delusional from the standpoint that if there are criminal statutes they are meaningless without an enforcement mechanism. For Federal criminal statutes that mechanism is the FBI. That does not mean I believe the FBI is above reproach. Quite the contrary. I personally believe that agency operates with way too little oversight.



So we can pencil you in for NEVER adding more to the US Marshall Service to do what they do now and what the FBI potentially used to do. Got it.
Abrignac Offline
#6 Posted: Thu, Feb 1 2024, 5:14 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
DrMaddVibe wrote:
So we can pencil you in for NEVER adding more to the US Marshall Service to do what they do now and what the FBI potentially used to do. Got it.


Once again you make a statement without understanding the basics guiding your proposal. You have absolutely no idea how federal and for that matter state law enforcement works. Otherwise, you’d see the sheer lunacy of what you propose.

https://www.usmarshals.gov/what-we-do wrote:
The duties of the U.S. Marshals Service include protecting the federal judiciary, apprehending federal fugitives, managing and selling seized assets acquired by criminals through illegal activities, housing and transporting federal prisoners and operating the Witness Security Program.


Nowhere at all in that description of responsibility is any reference whatsoever to law enforcement. So are you saying do away with the FBI? Then build the U.S. Marshal Service into a “New” FBI that not only provides the law enforcement component but also continues to do the job it’s mandated to do?

Please answer that question first? That way I can see what other delusional ideas you have about something to which you obviously have no concept of how it works. Once you do that we can take baby steps since it may be hard for you to understand it’s a tad more difficult than a broad stroke of the pen.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#7 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 3:39 AM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
Go play in the truck stop showers with your $hit and wonder why you're sick.

Dumbass
Abrignac Offline
#8 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 1:11 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Go play in the truck stop showers with your $hit and wonder why you're sick.

Dumbass


Now that’s what one would expect to hear from a 3rd grader. But, it’s no surprise. You're the type that if someone disagrees with you and you’re not smart enough you to raise a valid point your resort to juvenile name calling and such.

If my posts bother you there is an ignore button. Feel free to click on it next to my name. Might save yourself some embarrassment.

I actually thought about muting you when I muted Ray. But, I have to say there’s something amusing about a fool who seems to know how to fix everything he disagrees with, yet has has no idea what if anything is broken or if his solution would generate a much larger clusterfuck than the one he thinks must be fixed.

There are times I read the nonsense you post and see you as the guy who would try to help put out a fire. Thinking that any liquid would extinguish that fire because as a child he remembers watching cartoon characters grab buckets of liquids and toss their contents at the fire he reaches down and grabs a bucket of liquid, which happens to be gasoline, and tries to help. Yep, you remind me of that guy.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#9 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 1:13 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
Abrignac wrote:
Now that’s what one would expect to hear from a 3rd grader. But, it’s no surprise. You're the type that if someone disagrees with you and you’re not smart enough you to raise a valid point your resort to juvenile name calling and such.

If my posts bother you there is an ignore button. Feel free to click on it next to my name. Might save yourself some embarrassment.

I actually thought about muting you when I muted Ray. But, I have to say there’s something amusing about a fool who seems to know how to fix everything he disagrees with, yet has has no idea what if anything is broken or if his solution would generate a much larger clusterfuck than the one he thinks must be fixed.

There are times I read the nonsense you post and see you as the guy who would try to help put out a fire. Thinking that any liquid would extinguish that fire because as a child he remembers watching cartoon characters grab buckets of liquids and toss their contents at the fire he reaches down and grabs a bucket of liquid, which happens to be gasoline, and tries to help. Yep, you remind me of that guy.



Save it. Go play in truck stop restrooms. That's your speed.
Abrignac Offline
#10 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 1:16 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Save it. Go play in truck stop restrooms. That's your speed.



You’re nothing if not predictable.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#11 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 1:19 PM EST
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,498
You're nothing but truck stop restroom floor trash.

Predictable.

Vol 1 Ed 5.
Abrignac Offline
#12 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 1:25 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
DrMaddVibe wrote:
You're nothing but truck stop restroom floor trash.

Predictable.

Vol 1 Ed 5.


I rather be that than a perpetually angry half-wit little man-boy that does nothing but complain.
Gene363 Offline
#13 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 6:17 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,836
Civil Asset Forfeiture = Theft plain and simple.


https://www.cigarbid.com...t-Jury-Trials-in-Indiana
frankj1 Offline
#14 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 7:51 PM EST
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,223
no idea about other states (CBid Law of Proximity) but locally there is a particularly filthy yet legal action allowing cities and towns to seize and sell homes/properties if the owner has not paid property taxes within X amount of time.

worse still is even if the tax is only maybe, $1,500, they keep all the proceeds beyond the tax liability! The former owner gets ruined.

Recently a few of these cases have been challenged and hopefully will be corrected.

If not, perhaps they want me and Drafter should correct it for them
RayR Offline
#15 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 8:29 PM EST
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,918
frankj1 wrote:
no idea about other states (CBid Law of Proximity) but locally there is a particularly filthy yet legal action allowing cities and towns to seize and sell homes/properties if the owner has not paid property taxes within X amount of time.

worse still is even if the tax is only maybe, $1,500, they keep all the proceeds beyond the tax liability! The former owner gets ruined.

Recently a few of these cases have been challenged and hopefully will be corrected.

If not, perhaps they want me and Drafter should correct it for them


TAXATION IS THEFT!

We should hold the state to the same moral standards as non-​state actors.
Abrignac Offline
#16 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 8:41 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,313
frankj1 wrote:
no idea about other states (CBid Law of Proximity) but locally there is a particularly filthy yet legal action allowing cities and towns to seize and sell homes/properties if the owner has not paid property taxes within X amount of time.

worse still is even if the tax is only maybe, $1,500, they keep all the proceeds beyond the tax liability! The former owner gets ruined.

Recently a few of these cases have been challenged and hopefully will be corrected.

If not, perhaps they want me and Drafter should correct it for them


There was a case recently in which a federal appeals ruled that the municipality was only entitled to what it was owed the rest had to be returned to the plaintiff with interest. I’m pretty sure its the one you’re referring to where the taxes owed were a minuscule amount of the proceeds from the asset sale. The municipality had stated in its brief that should the ruling go against them they could be on the hook for millions and potentially be bankrupted. Seems they have been budgeting for years based on being able to keep funds they were never entitled to have.
Gene363 Offline
#17 Posted: Fri, Feb 2 2024, 11:19 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,836
frankj1 wrote:
no idea about other states (CBid Law of Proximity) but locally there is a particularly filthy yet legal action allowing cities and towns to seize and sell homes/properties if the owner has not paid property taxes within X amount of time.

worse still is even if the tax is only maybe, $1,500, they keep all the proceeds beyond the tax liability! The former owner gets ruined.

Recently a few of these cases have been challenged and hopefully will be corrected.

If not, perhaps they want me and Drafter should correct it for them



There are a lot of government entities that have puckered poop holes over the prospect of having to give back many millions of stolen equity. I cannot believe anyone would think this is acceptable.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top