Do forfeiture cases place justice on sale?

Detroit News ^ | 6/28/02 | Bill Johnson

[jimkress]

Pleasant Ridge attorney Ben M. Gonek contends that Wayne County Prosecutor Mike Duggan has a profit motive. Does allowing defendants charged with serious offenses to pay fines -- including fees to the prosecutor's office -- send the message that justice is for sale in Wayne County?

[goodieD]

There's another type of profitable "justice" going on. Every time the police tow your car for not having proof of insurance, or you don't have your registration up to date, and you can't pay the impound fees, they sell it for profit.
They don't have to tow it, it's up to them. But if they are gonna make a buck off of it, why should they just let you off with a warning?
Red light cameras. The police actually stated that it was a revenue generator. When law enforcement can generate extra revenue, doesn't this give the police more incentive to do the wrong thing?

[nyconse]

A family member recently was stopped for DWI. He was jailed for 24 hours and his car was seized by the government. He has not gone to court or been convicted of anything. If he is found innocent, the car will not be returned. How is this possible? Also, this car is not paid for. How can the government confiscate what in effect is owned by a third party (bank) without any legal basis. I certainly believe a person should lose the priviledge to drive if he is convicted of DWI, but I do not believe the government should be allowed to confiscate property. This misguided policy is a direct result of the drug war and is now being mightily abused by the government.

[goodieD]

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The "law and order" Repubs think that no measure is too extreme when it comes to dealing with "criminals", accused, convicted or not. There have been many horror stories in the WOD, but to certain people on here it's "law enforcement at all costs". To hell with anyone's rights.

[steve50]

but to certain people on here it's "law enforcement at all costs". To hell with anyone's rights.

They won't understand until it's their turn. Then listen to the moaning. The tobacco people are just starting to get a taste of it now, in ten years their homes will be up for grabs.

[ex-Texan]

Your local ordinance which permits this sort of 'legal confiscation' is Un-Constitutional. The same issue arose in Oregon and California. The auhorities cannot steal property 'under color of law.'

Might be good to file a class action law suit for a ton of money .... in fact, the damage claims might bankrupt a small municipality.

[jimkress]

the damage claims might bankrupt a small municipality

You aren't punishing the people who actually harmed you. I would suggest you file felony theft charges (or a civil suit or both) against the people involved in the taking and retention of the car. Yes, you will face a sovereign immunity barrier but that barrier can only be eliminated if we fight for criminal charges against those who steal our property - governmental or not.

[giojr]

Regarding the DWI case, is it possible to have the bank reposses the car?. The person's credit rating might be temporarily damaged, but it might be better than paying for a car that the person will never drive again.

[ItsJeff]

Your local ordinance which permits this sort of 'legal confiscation' is Un-Constitutional.

Local schmocal. Ed Meese invented this crap under America's first "zero tolerance" policy. If the feds found so much as a roach clip in your car, they seized the car, regardless of who actually owned it. If you were a drug dealer, the feds seized your house, even if you were just renting it. They also took the furniture and everything that they just assumed was paid for with drug money. The first President Bush put an end to that nonsense.