Jump to content


Photo

The Powers and Authority of Law Enforcement

chicken coup

22 replies to this topic

#21 status - Michaelruise

status - Michaelruise
  • Guests

Posted 06 July 2018 - 12:48 PM

Most of the students join law because they think this is the best carrier money wise they got.
  • 1



#22 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 06 July 2018 - 08:37 PM

Most of the students join law because they think this is the best carrier money wise they got.

 

85464792.jpg

 

:chuckle:


  • 0

#23 status - Guest

status - Guest
  • Guests

Posted 23 February 2019 - 12:04 AM

 

Wait a second here.....I smell marijuana!
 
How Police Officers Seize Cash From Innocent Americans
 

 

 

The Supreme Court Just Struck a Huge, Unanimous Blow Against Policing for Profit

The Supreme Court struck an extraordinary blow for criminal justice reform on Wednesday, placing real limitations on policing for profit across the country. Its unanimous decision for the first time prohibits all 50 states from imposing excessive fines, including the seizure of property, on people accused or convicted of a crime. Rarely does the court hand down a ruling of such constitutional magnitude—and seldom do all nine justices agree to restrict the power that police and prosecutors exert over individuals. The landmark decision represents a broad agreement on the Supreme Court that law enforcement’s legalized theft has gone too far.

They did so through civil asset forfeiture, a process that we would call theft in any other context. Here’s how it works: Prosecutors accuse an individual of a crime, then seize assets that have some tenuous connection to the alleged offense. The individual need not be convicted or even charged with an actual crime, and her assets are seized through a civil proceeding, which lacks the due process safeguards of a criminal trial. Law enforcement can seize money or property, including one’s home, business, or vehicle. It gets to keep the profits, creating a perverse incentive that encourages police abuses. Because the standards are so loose, people with little to no involvement in criminal activity often get caught up in civil asset forfeiture. For instance, South Carolina police tried to seize an elderly woman’s home because drug deals occurred on the property—even though she had no connection to the crimes and tried to stop them. They did so through civil asset forfeiture, a process that we would call theft in any other context. Here’s how it works: Prosecutors accuse an individual of a crime, then seize assets that have some tenuous connection to the alleged offense. The individual need not be convicted or even charged with an actual crime, and her assets are seized through a civil proceeding, which lacks the due process safeguards of a criminal trial. Law enforcement can seize money or property, including one’s home, business, or vehicle. It gets to keep the profits, creating a perverse incentive that encourages police abuses. Because the standards are so loose, people with little to no involvement in criminal activity often get caught up in civil asset forfeiture. For instance, South Carolina police tried to seize an elderly woman’s home because drug deals occurred on the property—even though she had no connection to the crimes and tried to stop them.

https://slate.com/ne...-rbg-timbs.html


  • 0



Reply to this topic



  



Similar Topics Collapse


Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: chicken coup

IPB Skin By Virteq