Even with PC as outlined in the 4th Amednment?A hard NO! If the fine structure covers it, so be it, but seizure of citizens property is wrong, anytime.
Even with PC as outlined in the 4th Amednment?A hard NO! If the fine structure covers it, so be it, but seizure of citizens property is wrong, anytime.
I believe I used that word in a previous post…Even with PC as outlined in the 4th Amednment?
Wonder if they could have stolen their bitcoin? Don’t think so.
Fourth amendment deals with unreasonable searches and seizures. So then the courts have to devise litmus tests and precedents around the word “unreasonable”.Even with PC as outlined in the 4th Amednment?
Right, if we just give them the Presidency, House, and Senate think what they could do...
I'm clear on that. While I haven't been involved in the civil forfeiture process, they do take these to a judge. Now it's a civil judge and the department must convince a judge (or jury I suppose).Fourth amendment deals with unreasonable searches and seizures. So then the courts have to devise litmus tests and precedents around the word “unreasonable”.
The 5th Amendment is extremely clear. It’s not simply probable cause. It’s due process. You want to seize their **** for department use? Take it to court. Battle it out with their representation in front of a judge.
The department should not get the money until all appeals are exhausted and if they lose the IRS interest levels should be paid plus attorneys fees. All this should come from department budgets. There needs to be risk for the department to deter frivolous seizures…Fourth amendment deals with unreasonable searches and seizures. So then the courts have to devise litmus tests and precedents around the word “unreasonable”.
The 5th Amendment is extremely clear. It’s not simply probable cause. It’s due process. You want to seize their **** for department use? Take it to court. Battle it out with their representation in front of a judge.
the money was in a safety deposit box in a bankIt wasn't a bank. It was a private storage company.
the money was in a safety deposit box in a bank
If the bitcoin was "offline" in a physcial crypto wallet (aka USB device) the FBI could physically have taken the device.Wonder if they could have stolen their bitcoin? Don’t think so.
You don't think the FBI employs hackers?
Upon review, @BigRed is correct.the money was in a safety deposit box in a bank
Doesn't laundering money usually involve creating the illusion of receiving the monies via legitimate means? How does one launder money through a deposit box?Upon review, @BigRed is correct.
“The owners of a Los Angeles-area company called U.S. Private Vaults Inc. were raided by the bureau after it was discovered they had been allowing drug dealers to launder money through the business, The Los Angeles Times reported.”
“They accepted a plea bargain that would see them not charged with any crimes but did allow the FBI to take $86 million in cash from various deposit boxes stored at their business. The Times reported millions of dollars more in jewelry and other items were also taken.”
Well, actually, Civil Forfeiture is a civil charge and they have to go before a judge/jury and show that what is being seized was either ill gotten profits, or bought with ill gotten profits (that is the accusation). Civil of course means 51% is all that is needed to prove the case. The Judge/jury gets to decide.Theft. The government, with their monopoly on use of force, take from citizens without so much as an accusation, let alone a prosecution and conviction. Theft. Tyrannical theft.
Respectfully, no. Civil forfeiture requires neither charges nor convictions. It's blatant theft.Well, actually, Civil Forfeiture is a civil charge and they have to go before a judge/jury and show that what is being seized was either ill gotten profits, or bought with ill gotten profits (that is the accusation). Civil of course means 51% is all that is needed to prove the case. The Judge/jury gets to decide.
And SCOTUS already slapped hands for this in Indiana…Respectfully, no. Civil forfeiture requires neither charges nor convictions. It's blatant theft.
Well, they don't exist in Civil cases. Theft though...interesting.Respectfully, no. Civil forfeiture requires neither charges nor convictions. It's blatant theft.
That is being looked intoAnd SCOTUS already slapped hands for this in Indiana…