9 Investigates: OHP's Use Of The Federal Asset Forfeiture Program

[RugersGR8]

I am NOT POINTING ANY FINGERS NOR LAYING ANY BLAME, but I am say with that much money involved, I would think there needs to be some type of oversight and controls on how much money is spent, where it is spent and to whom it is spent with. If nothing else, the oversight would at least give the impression that the right things were trying to be done and no malfeasance, miss-spending, corruption, etc., etc. is being done by those involved. And as discussed before on this forum, I think it must be proven that the person who's assests were seized(Civil Asset Forfeiture) was truly guilty of committing a crime before he must forfeit those assets/monies.


http://www.news9.com/story/30321792/9-investigates-ohps-use-of-the-federal-asset-forfeiture-program
9 Investigates: OHP's Use Of The Federal Asset Forfeiture Program
Posted: Oct 21, 2015 9:49 PM CDT Updated: Oct 21, 2015 9:49 PM CDT
By Alex Cameron, 9 Investigates

 

[SMS]

It doesn't need oversight. It needs to stop.

If someone is not arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, then the state should not be allowed to confiscate their property. Period. Even with a conviction they should only be allowed to seize property that is tied to the crime.

 

[TedKennedy]

It doesn't need oversight. It needs to stop.

If someone is not arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, then the state should not be allowed to confiscate their property. Period. Even with a conviction they should only be allowed to seize property that is tied to the crime.

Why are you wanting to tie law enforcement's hands? They can't operate without this ability, it's what helping us fight the war on drugs, and helps keep us free!

 

[SMS]

I'm a freedom hater...lol

 

[TedKennedy]

I think citizens need to give a free had to LEOs to finally clean this drug business up. If a few citizens rights get stepped on, so be it!

 

[NikatKimber]

It doesn't need oversight. It needs to stop.

If someone is not arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, then the state should not be allowed to confiscate their property. Period. Even with a conviction they should only be allowed to seize property that is tied to the crime.

I wholeheartedly agree!

 

[Raoul Duke]

OHP should be ordered to repay every penny with penalties that it misused or misspent and be restricted from using the equitable sharing program as any of the funding source for the reimbursement.

Until the repayment is made, the OHP should be suspended from participating in the equitable sharing program.

 

[rlongnt]

Don't hang your rights with your flags!

The Asset Forfeiture Program needs to STOP! NOW!

 

[Jack T.]

It doesn't need oversight. It needs to stop.

If someone is not arrested, charged, and convicted of a crime, then the state should not be allowed to confiscate their property. Period. Even with a conviction they should only be allowed to seize property that is tied to the crime.

I think this *is* gonna change in the next Oklahoma legislative session. Senator Kyle Loveless is *really* hot on this issue, and it's gaining traction.

 

[tRidiot]

OHP should be ordered to repay every penny with penalties that it misused or misspent and be restricted from using the equitable sharing program as any of the funding source for the reimbursement.

Until the repayment is made, the OHP should be suspended from participating in the equitable sharing program.

Article said it has all already been repaid.