Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Another victory against asset forfeiture!
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="vvvvvvv" data-source="post: 2079798" data-attributes="member: 5151"><p>The Institute for Justice helped Motel Caswell achieve a very important victory in the battle against asset forfeiture abuse. But keep in mind that had they not had the resources to keep the case alive long enough to attract IJ's attention so that IJ could represent them pro bono, its doubtful they would have succeeded. It takes a lot of resources to fight this kind of stuff, so most property owners end up walking away.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Here's the gist: a federal agent has a specific task to identify high-value properties particularly vulnerable to asset forfeiture. The Caswells own the motel outright, and its estimated to be worth well over $1M. Nearing retirement, the owners seem to be a perfect target as they appear unlikely to fight given their age and apparent lack of resources. The Government builds their case around 15 incidents spanning more than a decade involving drug abusers or traffickers staying at the hotel at least one night without the knowledge or involvement of the motel owners or employees of the tenants' business. The Government then seizes the motel as being a property having been used for illegal purposes.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Oversimplified analogy: This would be akin to the county seizing your farm because a group of teens or college students found it to be a great party spot for the underage consumption of alcoholic beverages and illegal consumption of marijuana without your knowledge or consent provided that you took reasonable steps to secure the property.</p><p></p><p><a href="http://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/private_property/forfeiture/caswellopinion-1-24-13.pdf" target="_blank">Decision</a></p><p></p><p>Video for a background:</p><p></p><p>[media=youtube]HGh-7LOzeHw[/media]</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="vvvvvvv, post: 2079798, member: 5151"] The Institute for Justice helped Motel Caswell achieve a very important victory in the battle against asset forfeiture abuse. But keep in mind that had they not had the resources to keep the case alive long enough to attract IJ's attention so that IJ could represent them pro bono, its doubtful they would have succeeded. It takes a lot of resources to fight this kind of stuff, so most property owners end up walking away. Here's the gist: a federal agent has a specific task to identify high-value properties particularly vulnerable to asset forfeiture. The Caswells own the motel outright, and its estimated to be worth well over $1M. Nearing retirement, the owners seem to be a perfect target as they appear unlikely to fight given their age and apparent lack of resources. The Government builds their case around 15 incidents spanning more than a decade involving drug abusers or traffickers staying at the hotel at least one night without the knowledge or involvement of the motel owners or employees of the tenants' business. The Government then seizes the motel as being a property having been used for illegal purposes. Oversimplified analogy: This would be akin to the county seizing your farm because a group of teens or college students found it to be a great party spot for the underage consumption of alcoholic beverages and illegal consumption of marijuana without your knowledge or consent provided that you took reasonable steps to secure the property. [URL="http://www.ij.org/images/pdf_folder/private_property/forfeiture/caswellopinion-1-24-13.pdf"]Decision[/URL] Video for a background: [media=youtube]HGh-7LOzeHw[/media] [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Another victory against asset forfeiture!
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
