Understanding Asset Forfeiture

…and the legal boundaries allowed by the Constitution.

Asset forfeiture is the idea that the government has the right to decide if a person is no longer entitled to their property, if they have been involved in criminal activities or civil matters where sale of the property may help relieve some of the burden of debt incurred. However, the steps taken to asset forfeiture in the Federal Court system tend to be outside the bounds of allowed practices in the Constitution. “The burden of proof on the FBI to seize property for civil, administrative, and judicial forfeiture is probable cause. This burden must be met to satisfy both statutory and constitutional requirements. A civil forfeiture action commences upon notification by mail and publication of the government’s intent to forfeit the property.” (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2009)

So according to the FBI legal documents they can force asset forfeiture simply by showing that someone may be involved in drug trafficking through someone they know or worse, because they may have received an email from a person who at one time or another through another person viewed a site that has been labeled terrorist. (i.e. Patriot Act allowances and RICO and the IRS as well.)

The Federal government normally prosecutes RICO violations however; based on the location of the “seizure” they will split the proceeds with the municipality, county, borough, town, state etc. This has led to questionable arrests and property seizures as well. If the Federal government was not allowed RICO and Patriot Act or IRS arrest privileges and as a result asset forfeiture more people would have more of the rights they should have per the Constitution. A side affect would be that the criminals in office would not be able to use their office to terrorize and “rule” the people.

See the following…

RICO related-

“Forfeiture laws have become increasingly popular with state and federal law enforcement officials during the last 10 years. A subject once relegated to obscure passages in the musty recesses of law books, and rarely invoked in practice, forfeiture has quickly become the darling of law enforcement. Since 1985, for example, the total value of federal asset seizures has increased over 1,500 percent–to over $2.4 billion, (1) including over $643 million for the Department of Justice in FY 1991 alone. (2) This bonanza for law enforcement officials, however, has become a Kafkaesque nightmare for some property owners, who have found themselves caught up in a world of bizarre legal doctrine, sometimes without the assets even to defend themselves.” (Reed, 1992)

“A New Jersey couple, for example, found their home and their two cars seized by local police based upon an allegation that they had violated New Jersey law by stealing Express Mail packages containing inexpensive clothing from the neighbors’ property.” (Reed, 1992) In addition, many more instances- look into this it is worth the effort.

Patriot Act related-

Forfeiture of terrorist assets (Section 806): authorizes broad civil forfeiture of assets related to domestic or international terrorism

Terrorism has been redefined recently as well by the Department of Homeland Security- the new definition of what could make a terrorist is “anyone who disagrees with the current policy makers…former soldiers of the United States military…anyone who owns or collects firearms…” (Basically myself and my friends, and colleagues etc.)

Therefore, here is the best part, if I really upset the Feds with something I write they can and will use an ILLEGAL law to take EVERYTHING from me and all they have to do is show “probable cause” NO PROOF Necessary.

IRS related –

First, did you know that the IRS also has a drug enforcement office, and because of who they are, they can in fact use their power to do the same that the above acts allow for?

“The average forfeiture value for the 11 IRS-CI major cases in our analysis is 1.9 million, while the average value of all IRS cases in our sample is $328,000, indicating that major cases have a higher average value than IRS-CI cases overall.” (Richardson, Clancy, 2009)

The Constitution-

Amendment IV

“The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” It does not say unless these people are Tax Evaders, Potential Mobsters, or terrorists…what it says is “right of the people”

Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

Again there is no distinction here- if you are accused you have RIGHTS in this nation! I could argue this one for days; however, it is my opinion that those Congressmen and Senators that passed the Patriot Act, RICO act, and IRS allowances of forfeiture. These people were wrong to do so and that because these laws have been passed there are likely people who have lost everything or are in prison that have not had a constitutionally legal trial. Again, I have to ask the question, when are people going to stop allowing these things to happen?

Federal Bureau of Investigation, (2009). Investigative Programs Asset Forfeiture: The Law. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/asset/legal.htm

Reed, T. (1992, September 29). American Forfeiture Law: Property Owners Meet The Prosecutor. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-179.html

Richardson, Clancy, Amy, Noreen. (2009,). Understanding Forfeitures: An Analysis of the Relationship between Case Details and Forfeiture between TEOAF High-Forfeiture and Major Cases. Retrieved from http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-179.html

© Jesse Mathewson

GHTime Code(s): bf822 d81e1