NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/activism/19751

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-22 | 9.7 KB

Xref: sparky alt.activism:19751 alt.politics.usa.misc:688 talk.politics.misc:65084
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.politics.usa.misc,talk.politics.misc
Path: sparky!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!cbnewse!doctor1
From: [e-mail] (patrick.b.hailey)
Subject: Re: What is United States of America like?
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 10:16:48 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 157

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Don Pajerek) writes:
>>Bullshit.  The Bill of Rights is alive and well.  There are individual
>>cases of overzealous enforcement, but the courts usually strike them down.
>Not exactly. It is now *legal* for drug enforcement personnel to seize
>the assets of people whom they want to accuse of drug trafficking. This
>seizure can take place *before* guilt or innocence is established, and
>recovery of assets in the event that the case falls apart has proven
>to be problematic. The courts have *not* been striking this down.

Oh, no.  It's MUCH worse than that.  Guilt or innocence simply doesn't matter.
You strongly imply that charges or even the desire to maybe charge the
seizure victim is necessary.  It is not.  80%+ of all seizures are from people
who are never charged.  80%+ of all items seized are worth less than $20,000.
Not the playthings of wealthy drug lords, but the simple possesions of
normal folks.

In 15 major airports, ticket agents are paid informants of the DEA.  If you
buy a ticket for cash, you fit the 'drug courrier profile'.  The ticket
agent informs the DEA, who will come and relieve you of any cash you have
on you, which is split with the informant.  You are given a receipt.  With
this receipt and $900, you have the "right" to begin the process of proving
the cash seized is NOT drug sale proceeds and NOT 'tainted' by criminal
activity.

Lawyers generally advise people that if the seized items are worth less
than $100,000, fighting it just isn't worth it.  Some people try, and
some people are destroyed by 'predetory seizure' for doing so.  It works
like this:

Cop comes to your door and says that 1 year ago, a friend of your son's used
your phone to make a drug deal.  Since your house is 'tainted' by criminal
activity, the state and fed governments now own it and you have to bug out.
You have some lakefront property you were going to retire to, so you put
that up for sale and hire a lawyer.  So, the gov comes back and seizes the
property, ruining your plan to sell it for money to hire a lawyer.  So, you
have nothing left in the world now but two cars and a boat.  You put
them up for sale, and the gov comes back and seizes them, too.  End of
story.  After all, if you weren't guilty, you'd sue to get your stuff back,
wouldn't you?

Houses have been seized from 75 year old widows who "didn't do enough" to
keep drug dealers from selling in front of their houses - despite many calls
to the police being on record.  Houses have been seized from people because
a drug dealer pointed to the house and said "There!  That's one of the places
I hid the stuff until I could get around to processing it!", despite the
fact that no one in the house was charged with anything, no police officer
ever searched for evidence, the occupants passed a lie detector test and the
drug dealer failed one, etc.  Oh, yes: in the particular case I'm thinking of,
the dealer is free and still owns his house.

The standard for seizing property is "probable cause" - the same standard
once needed for a simple search.  As was pointed out earlier, carrying
a 'large' amount of cash is now "probable cause" to suspect soemone of
being a drug dealer, so is also probable cause to take their cash, car,
and home.  It happens ALL the time.

Again, the PERSON is not charged, the PROPERTY is, so you can kiss any
seized cash goodbye no matter what.  Why?  Because 80-90% of ALL U.S.
currency has traces of cocaine on it.  Thus, it's 'tainted' by criminal
activity.  Once the cash is seized, it is put back into circulation, to
be seized again.

Does this mean that cops can pretty much walk up and down the street taking
cash from people?  Well, that's just about what's happening.

State cops pulling blacks over and extracting "anti-drug fund" donations.
Black U.S. citizens coming back from visiting relatives in Africa having
their jewlry and cash taken away because "they'd never let a black woman
out of Africa with a ring like that".  Honest people running cash-oriented
businesses (buying specialty plants from small nurseries, construction
equipment salvage, and so on) getting stopped on business trips and loseing
all their cash.  People who just happen to fit the drug courrier profile
that includes things like looking at a uniformed officer, not looking at
a uniformed officer, driving slowly, driving quickly, looking at a watch
while in an airport, being amongst the first group of people off a plane,
being amongst the last group of people off a plane, being amongst the
middle group of people off a plane, being non-white, driving a fancy
car, driving a plane car...   An Indiana farmer goes to the state cops
to report marijuana plants in his fields, so they seize his farm.  A
Hell's Angel is hired as a paid informant, and not ONE of the criminal
cases he was a witness in turns out, but the cops CONTINUE to use his
'tips' for the purposes of civil seizure.  Cops pull over a college kid in
a Trans Am because it might be stolen, like "similar cars frequently are",
search for THREE HOURS before finding a tiny bit of marijuana in "plain
sight", have the criminal case thrown out of court, but won't give the
car back...

A police chief in Florida, for a while, was *making* crack, and having his
cops go out and sell it.  They wouldn't arrest all buyers, as that would be
bad for business.  They would arrest a *few* buyers every day.  Some of
these cases would prove pretty embaressing in court, so they just wouldn't
charge them, but they'd keep the money paid for the crack plus any other
cash and perhaps a car or some jewlry.  This is one of the *few* scams
that the courts said was illegal.  As I understand it, the problem was
not the preying on citizens rather than working for the public good, nor
was it the fact that the cops were putting a lot of drugs on the street
and recovering only a little.  No, it was because making crack is illegal.
The moral: cops must deal plain old cocaine.

All while general assistance funds are being cut.  Drug enforcement is the
only area of law enforcement where the cops can actually make a profit.  Ending
the drug 'problem' would be suicide.  'Law enforcement' is addicted to the
War on (Some) Drugs.

No accounting of this money is required.  In most cases, it simply has to
go for 'law enforcement purposes', which can and does mean things like
buying Corvettes for police chiefs.  Some states specify that the money has to
go to schools or something other than law enforcement, so ALL drug cases in
those states tend to become *federal* cases, where the state law no longer
applies.  Can't get the feds interested?  Forget it, then.  We don't CARE if
he's a dangerous criminal, it's not cost effective to pursue it.

I better stop now.  All I've got to say is people better wake up, if it's
not too late already.  Laws being proposed + laws scheduled to kick in will
result in vitamins and nutritional supplements being declared [shudder]
DRUGS, subject to the same ruthless 'enforcement'.  Say you market something
and don't call it a 'nutritional supplement'.  Then some magazine comes
along and says that your product is a usefull nutritional supplement.  This
gives rise to probable cause that you and the magazine are in a 'conspiracy'
to dupe all the stupid, childish Americans into consuming what is now
(since it's a 'nutritional supplement' being sold without a perscription)
ILLEGAL DRUGS and both the magazine and your company can be seized by the
FDA - which is also lobbying for the money to have its own police force
to carry out these 'law enforcement' efforts.

D.A.R.E. certainly DOES encourage children to turn in their parents.  They
tell kids that ANYONE who smokes pot is INVARIABLY on the road to heroine
or cocaine addiction, that it's just a matter of time.  "But if you call
us, we'll help."  So, if a kid is aware that his parents have smoked pot,
he becomes scared and calls the nice officer.  And so is another happy
family destroyed.

In some places, the D.A.R.E. crap is handed out at the beginning of the class
and collected up at the end, NEVER to be taken home where parents will see it.

>In summary: Mr. Kuoppala overstates his case

No way.  This is just the tip of the iceburgh.  Breast feed baby longer than
some social worker who happens to hear about it thinks you ought to?  State
gets the kid.  Act interested when an undercover cop offers sex for money?
State takes your car.  Buy a 'grow light'?  Become a 'suspected marijuana
grower' and have your electric bills scrutinized to see if the lights
might be in use all the time - which leads to probable cause which leads
to having your house seized.  Have a Gratefull Dead sticker on your car?
Prepare to have some cop try to sweet talk you into consenting to a 'search',
which turns out to mean having it dismantled but NOT put back together.

There's a war going on out there.  It's a war on the American way of life.
The Bill of Rights and Constitution are long gone.  With the advent of
'mandatory minimum' sentencing, you can't even get justice from a jury
of your peers. Your government is now your master, and your master says
"work, pray, make babies (but don't enjoy it), and raise them FOR US".
Everything else is quickly becoming illegal.

   Thanks awfully,
             Patrick