Holder limits seized-asset sharing process that split billions with local, state police

Washingtop Post ^ | January 16 at 1:00 PM | Robert O'Harrow Jr., Sari Horwitz and Steven Rich

[jonascord]

The robbed civilians now have to go to FEDERAL courts to recover the stolen money? Just more layers of cushioning to flail against between you and government looting.

No honor among thieves.

[usurper]

On the surface it is a move in the right direction... which makes me wonder what is underneath that surface. Maybe he's just looking for a 75/25 split rather than 50/50.

Thats it, he just wants all the money for DOJ.

State and locals assist the feds every day. When the feds make an arrest for say 100 pounds of pot the US Attorney will not accept it for prosecution because the amount is below their "guidelines".

The feds then turn them over to state or locals for prosecution.

The state takes on the cost of prosecution and incarceration and the feds walk away scott free.

[ravenwolf]

This will let a lot of bad guys get away with their crimes. The Locals will be much, much less likely to pair up with the Feds to jointly investigate, instead going on their own so the Feds don’t get involved.

---

Which is the best part of it.

[indthkr]

What’s the REAL reason for this?

Protection of marijuana profits?

[GOPJ]

Holder stands with criminals...

[Lazamataz]

Sorry. There is NOT ONE ACTION by Obama and his flying monkeys that does not damage America. On the surface, this looks like the right thing, but somewhere below there is the true agenda.

[FreeReign]

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. on Friday barred local and state police from using federal law to seize cash, cars and other property without evidence that a crime occurred.

Wait a second.

So the Feds can still seize cash (without any evidence of a crime). It's just the local LEO's who can't?

[tbw2]

Evidence of a crime could mean anything seized.
I would only consider it progress if they said you can’t circumvent state laws to seize under the federal sharing statute without a conviction.

[GOPJ]

“There’s a common cause that bonds the black United States attorney with the black criminal.” - Eric Holder

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3247434/posts

[Skepolitic]

Blind squirrel. Acorn.

[FreeReign]

Holder stands with criminals...

I suspect innocent people could easily prove where the money came from and get their money back, and that all of the money seized and not returned was drug money.

That said, such seizures are unconstitutional.

[FreeReign]

Blind squirrel. Acorn.

Not really.

Unconstitutional seizures continue both by the Feds and by the locals.

Holder is just trying to defund the local police.

[Barkeep99]

Well, you suspect wrong. It is damnably difficult to get the money, vehicle, boat back. You the uncharged-with-any-crime victim of theft are not even named in the suit to retrieve the property. Friend of mine fell afoul of these greed-heads. Determined to see justice done he talked to an Atty. Lawyer told him to leave it be. Only $5,000 seized, I’m gonna have to charge you $7,000, Sorry, tricky and protracted cases, and a chance they will seize my fee, try to link it to the no-charge charge they are f**cking you with now.

[Barkeep99]

OK, third call for Real Reason. Reasonable query. The Real real reason is that his soon to be succesor, Loretta Lynch is a long time fan of seizure laws. Holder gets some nice going away pats on the back and NOTHING changes.

[af_vet_rr]

On the surface it is a move in the right direction... which makes me wonder what is underneath that surface. Maybe he's just looking for a 75/25 split rather than 50/50.

He knows it will end up tied up in the courts, or that it will continue, with many Americans not realizing that they still have some rights, and will not bother fighting it.

[af_vet_rr]

I suspect innocent people could easily prove where the money came from and get their money back, and that all of the money seized and not returned was drug money.

That said, such seizures are unconstitutional.

Innocent people could prove it, but it's not simply a case of showing up with a bank statement. Had a relative go through this in another state (they work the gun show circuit, and frequently carry cash and things they legally sell).

It was pure hell, with the cops trying to paint them as bad guys even though they had a very public business and are well-known amongst certain pro-2nd Amendment folks who would vouch for them anytime. They had everything needed to prove they owned everything, since they keep meticulous records for taxes/BATF/FFL/etc. records.

Ultimately they spent almost as much time and money fighting to get their money/items back, than was taken from them. I haven't talked to them after it was over to see if they can get back the expenses they incurred fighting this. They even had a local tell them that it would be cheaper if they would just give up the cash/items.

I hope that you never cross local LEOs who want something you have, or who are in a bad mood or looking to make a quota. Especially if they are of the militarized variety, who think of themselves as an occupying force, rather than an agency that's mean to serve and protect the public.