Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Asset seizures fuel police spending

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 69 posts

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#11

Post by rayiner »

jchrisa wrote: post #8
praptak wrote: post #3

A more explicit one on this subject, (don't be black while carrying valuables or police will assume you stole them): http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-texas-pro...

I read the whole WaPo article hoping they'd stop listing the things purchased with the funds (who cares?) and instead talk about where they got the funds and what percentage of seizures are dubious / fraudulent. The Chicago link provides a narrow window into that question, and it doesn't look good. For instance I have a nice painting on the wall that a friend created. There's no paper trail of how I got it. Does that…

The reason the answer to these questions is "no" is because ownership in a civil forfeiture proceeding must be proved by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. The difference between a car trunk full of $100 bills and a painting on your wall is proving that, "more likely than not" the item is the fruit of criminal activity.

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#12

Post by Omniusaspirer »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #6

If the Washington Post, and others, would turn the same eye on any other organization, they would have a field day of things they would find, but it wouldn't sell as many newspapers. The problem is, they make it sound like all police have these issues (and others they "report" on) when the reality is far from it. Someone will comment, "But the police shouldn't be doing this and it's a government institution!!", as if…

Oh please, I think the litany of "it's just a few bad apples" has been disproven enough already. I suppose the up to 40% domestic abuse rates among police families (4x national average) is lying about the reality as well?

http://womenandpolicing.com/violenceFS.asp

I don't claim to know what the solution to America's law enforcement problems are but I have grown increasingly tired of apologists rushing to defend every police action no matter how abhorrent. Police are an important part of any modern society and you aren't doing them favors by sparing them all scrutiny.

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#13

Post by al2o3cr »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #6

If the Washington Post, and others, would turn the same eye on any other organization, they would have a field day of things they would find, but it wouldn't sell as many newspapers. The problem is, they make it sound like all police have these issues (and others they "report" on) when the reality is far from it. Someone will comment, "But the police shouldn't be doing this and it's a government institution!!", as if…

Are you seriously arguing that expecting police officers to not be BANDITS is somehow asking too much?

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#14

Post by tomohawk »

This seems to be a clear violation of the doctrine of separation of powers.

Even if the seizing of assets is legit, the assets should be looked at as revenue, and should be allocated by the legislature, not the police department.

It is incredibly unseemly for police to be operating their own private economy based on forfeited assets that were acquired due to their position/power.

There should be a downside for police if the seizure turns out to not be legit. I don't think paying back double would be that out of line.

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#15

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #11
jchrisa wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the whole WaPo article hoping they'd stop listing the things purchased with the funds (who cares?) and instead talk about where they got the funds and what percentage of seizures are dubious / fraudulent. The Chicago link provides a narrow window into that question, and it doesn't look good. For instance I have a nice painting on the wall that a friend created. There's no paper trail of how I got it. Does that…

The reason the answer to these questions is "no" is because ownership in a civil forfeiture proceeding must be proved by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. The difference between a car trunk full of $100 bills and a painting on your wall is proving that, "more likely than not" the item is the fruit of criminal activity.

[deleted]

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#16

Post by toomuchtodo »

Omniusaspirer wrote: post #12
icantthinkofone wrote: post #6

If the Washington Post, and others, would turn the same eye on any other organization, they would have a field day of things they would find, but it wouldn't sell as many newspapers. The problem is, they make it sound like all police have these issues (and others they "report" on) when the reality is far from it. Someone will comment, "But the police shouldn't be doing this and it's a government institution!!", as if…

Oh please, I think the litany of "it's just a few bad apples" has been disproven enough already. I suppose the up to 40% domestic abuse rates among police families (4x national average) is lying about the reality as well? http://womenandpolicing.com/violenceFS.asp I don't claim to know what the solution to America's law enforcement problems are but I have grown increasingly tired of apologists rushing to defend every…

I should not have to start my iPhone voice recorder and keep my vehicle's dashcam running during a traffic stop because of fears I would normally have living someplace like Russia.

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#17

Post by bryanlarsen »

rayiner wrote: post #11
jchrisa wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the whole WaPo article hoping they'd stop listing the things purchased with the funds (who cares?) and instead talk about where they got the funds and what percentage of seizures are dubious / fraudulent. The Chicago link provides a narrow window into that question, and it doesn't look good. For instance I have a nice painting on the wall that a friend created. There's no paper trail of how I got it. Does that…

The reason the answer to these questions is "no" is because ownership in a civil forfeiture proceeding must be proved by a "preponderance of the evidence" standard. The difference between a car trunk full of $100 bills and a painting on your wall is proving that, "more likely than not" the item is the fruit of criminal activity.

"preponderance of the evidence" is a low standard compared to the "presumed innocent" standard of criminal trials. It's not helped by the fact that the judge in civil forfeiture proceedings sometimes has a clear conflict of interest: cf. Coutroom 478. http://www.forbes.com/sites/instituteforjustice/2014/08/26/p...

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#18

Post by q2 »

Reading of such articles makes me wonder about the reports/ranks given by transparency international ...etc on corruption. Comment by @icantthinkofone in this thread indicates this problem can be seen in other organizations too. If that is true, then corruption is there across all public organizations in US. In India too, we hear stories of corruption but scale is different. I conclude, it is explicit in some sectors/countries and implicit/polished/organized in other sectors/countries i.e. indices such as corruption,human life quality are just instruments to point out at emerging countries and show them in negative shades while pushing similar issues in developed countries silently under carpet and showing them in positive shades (at least during preparation of ranks). After consistent media focus, damage will be done and countries will be forever labeled as negative and leaders,future generations will forever live in that pseudo bubble thinking that they are inferior/corrupt ...etc to developed ones. (Many Indians think America/Europe is heaven with no issues like drought/crime...etc).

I included human life quality because as long as systems are working, west including Europe and America appear good(seeing from very far) but once in a while catastrophe occurs(due to nature or man-made), then we will see ugly side (e.g: looting during katrina[1], London riots[2], riots in sweden[3] ...etc) as if that ugly side is suppressed under the weight of systems/rules rather than genuine intrinsic goodness of people living there[4].

My intention is not to show any one in bad light but to give the conclusion or correct the myth that just because a country is materially wealthy i.e. developed, does not mean that there will be no daily issues. If emerging countries like BRICS understand that, then they pursue all round development rather than blindly becoming photo copies of west in pursuit of material wealth and harming themselves like pollution in china[5].

[1] http://www.nbcnews.com/id/9131493/ns/us_news-katrina_the_lon... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_England_riots [3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_Stockholm_riots [4]http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2011/03/15/why-is-there-no... [5]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_in_China

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#19

Post by theonemind »

icantthinkofone wrote: post #6

If the Washington Post, and others, would turn the same eye on any other organization, they would have a field day of things they would find, but it wouldn't sell as many newspapers. The problem is, they make it sound like all police have these issues (and others they "report" on) when the reality is far from it. Someone will comment, "But the police shouldn't be doing this and it's a government institution!!", as if…

They should be held to a higher standard, as they have power granted to them by the public to use in the public interest.

Re: Asset seizures fuel police spending

#20

Post by PaulAJ »

This article is a distraction from the real issue. Most of the spending (including the oft-repeated $225 for "Sparkles the clown") is legitimate. The process of civil forfeiture, on the other hand, is a clear violation of the constitution.
Post reply on HN