Posted on 12/08/2021 5:44:19 AM PST by Kaslin
After police in Berkshire County, Massachusetts, took her car, Malinda Harris did not get a chance to contest the seizure for five and a half years. After the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute threatened to file a lawsuit on her behalf last March, the county agreed within a week to return the car, which she finally got back this summer.
The contrast between those two timelines shows how easy it is for the government to seize innocent people's property under civil forfeiture laws, which allow law enforcement agencies to supplement their budgets by confiscating assets they claim are connected to criminal activity. Harris' experience with legalized larceny, which she describes in congressional testimony she will give on Dec. 8, illustrates how that system is rigged against property owners.
The Berkshire County Law Enforcement Task Force seized Harris' 2011 Infiniti G37 on March 4, 2015, because her son, Trevice, was suspected of selling drugs. Although Harris had let Trevice borrow her car, the cops did not allege that he used it for drug dealing or that she knew about his illegal activity.
Harris did not get a receipt, and she heard nothing more about her purloined property until October 2020, when she received a civil forfeiture complaint that had been prepared the previous January. As Goldwater Institute senior attorney Stephen Silverman noted in a Feb. 25 motion, Massachusetts "does not provide any deadline (by) which the Commonwealth is required to initiate forfeiture proceedings."
Like most states, Massachusetts lets police seize property when they have "probable cause" to believe it was used for drug trafficking. But once they have met that minimal threshold, the burden of proof shifts to the owner, who must show that the property is (SET ITAL)not(END ITAL) subject to forfeiture -- a rule that helps explain why Massachusetts was the only state to receive an F in the Institute for Justice's 2020 report on civil forfeiture laws.
Massachusetts allows innocent owners to seek the return of their assets unless they "knew or should have known that such conveyance or real property was used in and for the business of unlawfully manufacturing, dispensing, or distributing controlled substances." But like the federal government and most states, it requires owners to prove their innocence, the reverse of the presumption that applies in criminal cases.
Law enforcement agencies get to keep the proceeds from forfeitures -- up to 100% in Massachusetts and many other states. Therefore, they have a strong incentive to seize first and ask questions later, which seems to be what happened in Harris' case, given how quickly Berkshire County threw in the towel after it became clear that she was able to put up a fight.
"This is even worse than being victimized by a criminal," Harris says in her testimony to the House Committee on Oversight and Reform. "When it is the police taking your property, who can you call?"
Harris was lucky to have pro bono legal representation. For owners who don't, challenging a forfeiture often costs more than their property is worth.
The Institute for Justice estimates that "hiring an attorney to fight a relatively simple state forfeiture case costs at least $3,000 -- more than double the national median currency forfeiture." Unlike criminal defendants, owners of seized property generally have no right to court-appointed counsel, so people of modest means are ill-equipped to defend themselves against state-sanctioned theft.
"I was extremely fortunate," says Harris, who recently gave her car to her college-bound granddaughter. "I got my car back. I know that most people lose their property because they do not understand the legal process and they cannot afford a lawyer."
Harris' ordeal was an eye-opening experience. "The police should not be able to take, and keep for themselves, the property of people never convicted of a crime," she says. "How do you teach your children to respect the law, when the people who are sworn to uphold it can take your property on nothing more than naked suspicion?
After sitting in a lot for 6 years, I wouldn’t want the car either.
I wonder what condition it was in, and how many extra miles it had on it.
Now the bluebook value is 20% of what it was when it was stolen.
Democrats create laws that keep undermining respect for the law.
That is why so many of these perps resist police arrests....Democrats have created so many nuisance laws in our big cities that minorities are harassed regularly by the police.....the police who report to the Democrat city council and mayor.
The war on drugs is a failure, but the rules remain in place. The same for the war on poverty, the war on terrorism, etc.
The same will be true of the war on climate change..their “cure” will fail, but the laws will remain in place.
I worked for a city that had impounded a car after a drug deal gone bad. The owner was killed trying to sell sheetrock dust/powder as cocaine. The car also had $20,000 in cash in the door panel.
The city was forced to payback the money and return the car to the dead guys estate after about 2 years.
You were victimized by criminals.
The war on drugs is a failure, but the rules remain in place. The same for the war on poverty, the war on terrorism, etc.
Virtually every Democrat phrase that includes the the word “war” is a failure, which always bring the phrase Rule of Unintended Consequences.
Democrat real wars have been failures also...Vietnam, Iraq, Syria and Afghanistan.
“AND there is zero redress for the lose of use OR value over time.”
Yep... And the worst part is they would be just absolutely fine with it only bringing $200 at the police auction because it cost them zero.
Civil forfeiture laws are simply WRONG. There is NO GOOD REASON any governmentatl organization should be able to simply take property, often on flimsy evidence, and then KEEP THE MONEY from a subswquent fraudulent sale.
It is WRONG.
Sorry, but Iraq is a Win. Get your head out of the MSM’s butt. We still have bases there and thousands of troops -at the request of the Iraqi government I’ll add. Maybe WWII is a loss too?
Well, it won’t run, cost thousands to repair. And she’ll probably be charged storage fees too.
I’m guessing that abuses and corruption like this won’t be addressed in any fashion by Biden’s new 5 point anti-corruption campaign announced on Dec. 6th.
After six years, I would guess some police boss was about ready to pick up a new set of wheels from the impound lot.
YouTube is rife with asset forfeiture cases that are dirty.
I watched one just the other day where a retired military male who didn’t trust banks was carrying a large sum of cash in the car to visit his kids. Going from Texas to California. I believe it was around $40k. Admittedly not smart, but nothing illegal about it.
He was dumb enough to be cooperative and answer all questions asked of him. Then, he gave permission to search his car. He had done nothing wrong, after all.
Cop’s supervisor shows up. Demands a drug dog sniffs the cash. The dog hits in the cash. Boom. It’s drug money and seized. No charges, no arrest of the “drug dealer”
Took a lawsuit to get his money back.
Several lessons learned. Be polite, but don’t answer questions. Don’t carry life savings in the car with you. Don’t give permission to search your vehicle.
Also, the lawsuit quoted a study that over 60% of all cash bills have traces of drugs on them.
So, odds are, you’re carrying drug money.
Good question about the mileage.
Since is wasn’t stated, guessing her son was convicted. Did she continue to pay the insurance and make payments?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.