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
Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions w/ local, state police
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="_CY_" data-source="post: 2883921" data-attributes="member: 7629"><p>which is exactly the point of Loveless legislation, those 99% seizures averaging $1,200 NOT falling into interdiction catagory. but as you pointed out the results are the same .. cash and/or property seized without due process. which without getting into specifics of each case sure seems like a direct violation of our forth amendment.</p><p></p><p>one point that cannot be disputed is the fact that seized funds are going directly into operating $$$ of arresting agency. when we are talking about millions of $$$ of additional funding. It's impossible those millions $$$ of seized assets NOT affect how that particular LEO agency operates.</p><p></p><p>it doesn't take an accountant to figure out legal costs to recover said $1,200 could exceeds recovered funds. with defendant and/or citizen never charged end up owing attorney additional $$$, even if said $1,200 successfully was recovered.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="_CY_, post: 2883921, member: 7629"] which is exactly the point of Loveless legislation, those 99% seizures averaging $1,200 NOT falling into interdiction catagory. but as you pointed out the results are the same .. cash and/or property seized without due process. which without getting into specifics of each case sure seems like a direct violation of our forth amendment. one point that cannot be disputed is the fact that seized funds are going directly into operating $$$ of arresting agency. when we are talking about millions of $$$ of additional funding. It's impossible those millions $$$ of seized assets NOT affect how that particular LEO agency operates. it doesn't take an accountant to figure out legal costs to recover said $1,200 could exceeds recovered funds. with defendant and/or citizen never charged end up owing attorney additional $$$, even if said $1,200 successfully was recovered. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions w/ local, state police
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom