Re: Policing for Profit
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Chuck Anderson</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I didn't see any indication of 4th amendment violations at all. I didn't see any searches of vehicles without consent.</div></div>
...and we don't really hear any people saying "yes" either, so we are "assuming" they did consent. I will agree that the tape is missing a lot, and as I noted there is a huge "spin" at work here... it is the media, after all. I'll never understand why people consent to searches, especially if they know they got stuff to hide. Personally, I respect the police but unless you've got a warrant, we're done here. I don't have anything to hide, but i'd make them do it just out of principle.
That said, if a LE dept. or the gov. fails to press charges, I think keeping the money is chickenshit. People are afraid to claim it because they think they are being setup, and with a DA like that I wouldn't put entrapment past her. Why should the burden of ownership be on the accused? That is not how our laws were supposed to be interpreted.
I fail to see how taking something without pressing charges is NOT an unreasonable seizure, and retaining something in the absence of a claim just makes it "de-facto" even if not willful. Shifting blame to the accused and making the "de-facto" seizure "their fault for not claiming it" is NOT a legitimate way to avoid violation of the 4th, IMHO. The accused did not begin this action, the police did, and as such the burden is on THEM to uphold the law. This is just another smooth operator DA running a scam on people she knows won't be able to fight back.
I'd guess that many of these folks were not charged because the DA knew the cases had too many holes to hold water in court. If that's the case, then these agencies are counting on people defaulting on the claims and not giving the money back. I'd love to know how much is getting cut off the top here for "officials"... I hope they eventually step on the wrong toes and get their asses sued into the stone age.
I'm sure they are catching a lot of drug dealers here, but the methodology is alarming to me. No doubt innocent people have been inconvenienced, if not suffered damages under this policy. This is just like being harassed at the border for carrying thousands in cash even though it's nowhere near the statutory limit for declaration. Practices like this are designed to mask the real enemy, which is government intrusion into our everyday lives. IMHO, that constitutes a violation of civil liberties and ultimately, it's just another for liberty to die.
I'm not inclined to believe everything here, but this does smell funny, doesn't it? It only takes one bad apple to spoil the whole bunch, and this type of system is ripe for the pickin'.