Tumgik
#forfeiture
theozgnomian · 3 months
Text
Legalized Theft
youtube
Policing for dollars.
0 notes
bobmueller · 9 months
Text
Unveiling the Dark Side of Civil Asset Forfeiture and Its Impact
Again with the smoker last week. Click for bigger I did chicken leg quarters and breasts for family dinner Monday night over charcoal and pecan. Thanks to Oldest Son for the Uncle Jammy’s River City Rub that I used. I added the breasts about 2 hours after I started the quarters. Note that if you’re going to do that, provide lots of airflow to the firebox so it gets back up to temp quickly. I…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
0 notes
p3q3oaxtfu · 1 year
Text
Amateur footjob #34 MILF ped socks, ballbusting, kicking and cum in sock Big ass latina camgirl with dildo and vibratoy on webcam Elegant teen is stretching soft cunt in closeup and having orgasm Lesbians lives out their high school fantasy as they fondle each others breast and pussy Straight naked hispanic men and college swim studs nude swims gay Liv Revamped and Mindi Mink fuck after a massage session Sizi Sev And Dustin Daring In Unlocks Unlimited Fucking Orgasms Cute teen blonde fingering hd Dukke the Philanthropist Sexy Cam Girl Gets Fucked By Her BF Girl Takes Huge Dildos on Chaturbate
1 note · View note
apas-95 · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
39K notes · View notes
mmbob · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
0 notes
newschurn · 2 years
Text
Justice Department Seeks Forfeiture of Los Angeles Mega-Mansion Purchased with Proceeds of Armenian Corruption Scheme
Justice Department Seeks Forfeiture of Los Angeles Mega-Mansion Purchased with Proceeds of Armenian Corruption Scheme
BAKU, Azerbaijan, May 6. The United States is seeking the forfeiture of a more than 30,000-square-foot mega-mansion in the Holmby Hills neighborhood of Los Angeles, pursuant to a civil forfeiture complaint filed that alleges that the mansion was purchased with bribes paid by an Armenian businessman to the family of Gagik Khachatryan, a former high-ranking Armenian public official, Trend reports…
Tumblr media
View On WordPress
0 notes
hellenhighwater · 8 months
Text
huge shoutout to rejection sensitive dysphoria and the attorney who mentioned that I'd misspelled "forfeiture" in my notes, ensuring that I will literally never misspell that word ever again. Thanks, it's just what I needed. I would have rather been shot, but this works also.
606 notes · View notes
odinsblog · 2 years
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media Tumblr media
Defund the gang in blue
👉🏿 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/11/23/cops-took-more-stuff-from-people-than-burglars-did-last-year/
1K notes · View notes
gwydionmisha · 8 months
Text
114 notes · View notes
beardedmrbean · 5 months
Text
Tumblr media Tumblr media
Fucking feds
30 notes · View notes
salteytakesonmanga · 10 months
Text
Tumblr media
Pfffft, as though Nezumi was ever actually going to try to track down the original owners of that money.
It’s always interesting to me when you can identify details Oda includes that have been taken from the real world, like Gray Terminal being based on the Smokey Mountain open air dump in Manila.
In this case, confiscating private property without a criminal charge or conviction is called Civil Asset Forfeiture. The average amount seized is about $1,000 and in most cases the money goes directly to cops, to the tune of billions of dollars a year. Most people who have their money stolen like this never get it back, even if they are ultimately never charged with anything.
Apropos of nothing, over 50% of Americans have less than $1,000 in savings.
I’m not saying. But I’m just saying…
20 notes · View notes
Link
For the Ferguson police department in the 2000s and 2010s, ticketing functioned as a form of organized plunder. As the Department of Justice reported, one woman received a $151 fine for parking her car illegally in 2007. Over the next seven years, when she missed payments or court dates resulting from those missed payments, she received seven failures to appear, each of which produced new arrest warrants and more fines and fees. On two occasions, she tried to put money down on her debt, but the court refused anything other than full payment. By December of 2014, she had been arrested twice, held in jail for six days, and still owed $541, even though she had already paid more than four times the sum of the initial ticket. This was unjustifiable, in the eyes of the Department of Justice. This was a police department that willingly and regularly brandished not only the billy club but also the pen.
And when the Ferguson police did wield its physical weapons, it often did so in the way a stickup kid holds the gun but grabs the jewels, using the threat of violence to coerce civilians into paying up. “[A]rrest warrants,” the report concludes, “are used almost exclusively for the purpose of compelling payment through the threat of incarceration.” Elsewhere, the DOJ writes, “Ferguson’s law enforcement practices are shaped by the City’s focus on revenue.” This was a department of organized, armed robbers, but with one key difference: the badge. With this shield, they expected and often received impunity. This made the Ferguson PD more terrifying than a civilian robber. At least that person only has the arms they carry; the Ferguson PD had an arsenal and backup, to say nothing of the weapon that is the prison. And the Ferguson police reigned without fear of repercussion and without any means for accountability. Unsurprisingly, they turned tyrannical, transforming people into walking ATMs for the city’s budget. Those whom they robbed, it goes without saying, were most often Black.
122 notes · View notes
nodynasty4us · 6 months
Link
From the October 30, 2023 article:
In theory, civil asset forfeiture is a tool for depriving scary street gangs and wealthy drug kingpins of the means to keep plying their deadly trades. In practice, it amounts to legalized extortion or even outright theft, and empowers armed state agents to line their pockets at the expense of legally innocent people who have no meaningful recourse.
10 notes · View notes
thatstormygeek · 12 days
Text
This is big, y’all. First, these numbers:
Last week, the Kansas Legislature voted 120-0 in the House and 35-0 in the Senate to send Gov. Laura Kelly a bill transforming the asset seizure statute.
Anyone who has paid any attention to the KS legislature knows you don’t get unanimous votes. Not on real reform. And not when the cops and KBI are actively against it.
Now these numbers:
The bill would require the seizing law enforcement agency to forward to a county or district attorney a written request for the forfeiture within 14 days. Current law sets that clock at 45 days.
But there’s so much more. It removes offenses related to “possession or use of controlled substances” from the list of those that allow seizure & forfeiture actions. It increases the burden of proof required to begin these actions at all. Forces the cops to keep the case instead of passing it off to the feds to avoid accountability.
Not perfect, of course. But good stuff.
2 notes · View notes
wonder-worker · 15 days
Text
It is difficult to argue that [Edward IV] was wrong in what he did. His advancement of [Richard of Gloucester] can be criticized only by those who believe that the only good nobleman is an impotent nobleman. Medieval kings did not think in these terms. Gloucester’s power was valuable because it ensured royal control of a significant and troublesome part of the country. Nor can Edward be blamed for not foreseeing the ends to which Gloucester might put his power. The duke had been a loyal upholder of the house of York, a central figure in Edward’s polity*; there was no obvious reason why he should not occupy the same role under Edward V. In this respect, precedent was on Edward’s side. Previous minorities had seen squabbles over the distribution of power, but no young king had ever been deposed. Even royal uncles traditionally drew a line at that, something which explains why Gloucester’s actions seemed so shocking to contemporaries and, perhaps, the reason why he got away with it so easily in the short term.
In the immediate sense, Gloucester must take final responsibility for what happened in 1483. However one explains the motives behind his actions, things happened because he chose that they should: there is nothing in the previous reign which compelled him to act as he did.
-Rosemary Horrox, "Richard III: A Study of Service"
*Richard was also, yk, Edward's own brother who had been entirely loyal during his life. The problem wasn’t that Edward trusted Richard, the problem is that Richard broke that trust in a horrible and unprecedented way to usurp a 12-year-old. Please understand the difference.
#wars of the roses#edward iv#richard iii#edward v#my post#The arguments of Ross and Pollard (et al) are so profoundly unserious and ahistorical#casting an unforeseeable turn of events as a predictable ('structural') one as David Horspool rightly puts it#Ross specifically is entirely dependent on his own horrible view of Elizabeth Woodville and her family as the basis of his analysis#but anyway. as Horrox points out later in the book:#''although earlier events [during Edward's reign] cannot be said to have caused the crisis they did have some bearing in how it developed'#namely Edward's legacy of forfeitures in the 1460s; manipulation of property descents; and fluctuating royal favour.#the most prominent and politically important of all of these were the manipulation of the Mowbray and Howard family fortunes#This is often used to enhance the unserious and ahistorical arguments of historians like Ross and Pollard that Edward doomed his son#But as Horrox points out: Edward's reign did not exist in a vacuum and needs to be analyzed by actual historical context.#from a broader perspective his actions were not especially transgressive as far as English kings were concerned#NO MONARCH (Edward III; Henry VII; etc) died with every single one of their nobles 100% content and supportive#they weren't living in Disney movies and there's no point holding Edward IV to fairytale standards that did not exist.#More importantly Horrox points out that Edward's actions (eg: the Mowbray and Howard cases) need to be put into actual perspective#They were not perceived as problems and did not cause problems during his own reign.#They did not cause problems after he died before Edward V arrived in London.#They only became problems after Richard decided to seize power and deliberately exploited them as bribes for political support#Had Richard decided to support his nephew or work with the Woodvilles - Edward's actions (@ the Mowbrays and Howards) would be irrelevant#(It's also worth pointing out that we don't know WHEN Richard decided to usurp. It if it was a more gradual desire then his depowering#of the Woodvilles by exploiting Mowbray & Howard discontent would not have not affected *Edward V's* ascension or prospects)#ie: the problem isn't that discontent existed with a few specific nobles (that was normal) the problem was how Richard took advantage of it#In theory this sort of thing would have been a potential threat for ANY heir to the throne whether they were a minor or an adult#In itself it's not really unique to Edward and it's silly when historians criticize him and him alone for it. It was more or less standard.#(if anything the fact that he was able to do them so successfully is an indication of his authority)#We come back to Horspool's point: 'Without one overriding factor' - Richard's initiative and actions - 'none of this could have happened.'#which is where this analysis of Horrox's comes in :)
3 notes · View notes
socialjusticefail · 6 months
Text
Civil asset forfeiture is one of those things that cops and the government use to get around a lot of protections.
3 notes · View notes