Law enforcement officials in Oklahoma are distraught about a bill to reform civil asset forfeiture.
I’m sure nobody is going to like it when they get their house, car, money, or other things seized by the authorities because they think, or are investigating, you because they think that you are doing something illegal. To me this seems to be “guilty until proven innocent”. I have always been under the assumption that in this country you are innocent until proven guilty.
Now, interestingly enough the U.N. has it in their Universal Declaration of Human Rights under article 11: “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.” But the Constitution of the United States “does not cite it explicitly, presumption of innocence is widely held to follow from the 5th, 6th, and 14th amendments. [Wikipedia]
Now the 5th Amendment is the one that deals with the Grand Juries, Double Jeopardy, Self Incrimination, Due Process, and Takings. This is where we get the “nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. So right here we have the Constitution telling us that we cannot take a persons property with out first the due process. I really don’t care if you are suspected of engaging in illegal affairs, or flat out know to be. If you are not convicted of a crime, then the government should not be able to take your possessions. Now remember we are just talking about the government seizing and KEEPING your property. It is still certainly OK for them to issue a warrant for it if there is probably cause. And then if you are found innocent you get it back.
Now Wikipedia was also citing the 6th Amendment, but I really don’t see what they are talking about. This one is just the right to a speedy trial (yea, right), right to witnesses and counsel. So we will skip this one.
With the 14th Amendment we are now extending the rights of the 5th to naturalized citizens of the United States. Now the Amendment says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States” so we basically have the Constitution saying TWICE what the 5th Amendment said earlier. Can’t get any more clear than that, can you?
The bill that was presented to the Oklahoma legislature was brought by State Sen. Kyle Loveless (R). This is one of the few things that I would agree with a Republican on. One of the things that the article says is that the state doesn’t have to have a definitive proof of a crime before seizing the assets. Wait, what? So because they think that that you might be involved in some sort of illegal activity, without proof of it, they can seize your property? So I think I’ll stop unloading all those legally purchased televisions from the back of a U-Haul at 2am into my rightfully owned run down building on the docks. Just Kidding btw.
A report from The Institute for Justice said that nearly $100 million from seizures from 2000 to 2014 was taken in. And the authorities are saying that if they get less money from the seizures that they will have less to work with in order to catch the criminals. Well, shit yea you will, but you’re taking the money it what appears to be an illegal fashion anyhow. Cut down on some other excess spending, get your budget under control, and maybe you can make up the difference.
As a tax payer, and one who likes the idea of the police keeping the bad guys off the streets, I don’t mind them using my money for legit things. But if you are using my money to illegally seize property, even if it is from criminals, that’s when I have an issue with it. There is always that “fruit of the poisoned tree” thing that the cop shows are always talking about. That is where if you illegally search property, or seize it, then any proof of guilt that was discovered because of the illegal activity can’t be used in court.
One thing that the article talks about and is part of the focus of the legislation is that when the assets are seized that either they are being sold, or money seized is being used prior to the conviction of the criminal. But keep in mind that you cannot be labeled a criminal until after a conviction. Up until then you are just an innocent person accused of a crime. Selling the property and then using the funds prior to a conviction is just flat out plain wrong!! What if it turns out that the person is innocent? What if it turns out that the person is acquitted, and wants their stuff back? You have just opened yourself up to a whole bunch of lawsuits.
Believe me, I get that the police and the investigators need more money to do their job and that they are looking for anyway to get it. But this way is not only wrong, but it is unconstitutional, and the Constitution says it in two places as we talked about above. I agree with Senator Loveless and if I was in his district I would vote for this, even if I am a Democrat. Let’s take a good look at all the ways that the state, not only Oklahoma, but all all of them, are wasting money, rearrange the budget so we are spending on things that need to be funded, and not spending money on “bridges to nowhere”. Even then I think the police are not going to have enough to do what they want, but hey, every little bit helps right? And now we are doing it legally.
And let me just finish this Rant with a Big Big Thank You to all of you out there that have served as police officers, or have friends and family that are part of the police organizations. You do a hard job, and one that I do not envy. Keep up the good work!
Love to you all!
~Ryan
The DisInformation Protocol 