Asset Forfeiture Laws Are Evil
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 10 months ago
Thomas Williams was alone that November morning in 2013 when police raided his rural St. Joseph County home, wearing black masks, camouflage and holding guns at their sides. They broke down his front door with a battering ram.
“We think you’re dealing marijuana,” they told Williams, a 72-year-old, retired carpenter and cancer patient who is disabled and carries a medical marijuana card.
When he protested, they handcuffed him and left him on the living room floor as they ransacked his home, emptying drawers, rummaging through closets and surveying his grow room, where he was nourishing his 12 personal marijuana plants as allowed by law. Some had recently begun to die, so he had cloned them and had new seedlings, although they were not yet planted. That, police insisted, put him over the limit.
They did not charge Williams with a crime, though.
Instead, they took his Dodge Journey, $11,000 in cash from his home, his television, his cell phone, his shotgun and are attempting to take his Colon Township home. And they plan to keep the proceeds, auctioning off the property and putting the cash in police coffers.
More than a year later, he is still fighting to get his belongings back and to hang on to his house.
“I want to ask them, ‘Why? Why me?’ I gave them no reason to do this to me,” said Williams, who says he also suffers from glaucoma, a damaged disc in his back, and COPD, a lung disorder. “I’m out here minding my own business, and just wanted to be left alone.”
The seizure was allowed under Michigan’s Civil Asset Forfeiture laws, which allow police to take property from citizens if they suspect a crime was committed, even when there is not enough evidence to charge them. Homeowners like Williams have to prove they did not purchase their property with proceeds from criminal activity and then sue to get the property back.
Why you? You happened to be available when the police needed to raise some revenue. It’s that simple. I’m so sorry for this poor man (and let me say here that I couldn’t care less that he had some hemp growing in his house, any more than I care if a man makes some untaxed corn liquor in his back yard), but these laws made by the legislature are evil.
I don’t care what this man did. There isn’t any reason at all that the state should legally be able to confiscate possessions. In the worst case (let’s say that a man goes to prison for murder), his possessions could be treated as if he passed away and his will invoked (his children would then inherit his possessions, or whomever was named in his will). The advantage of this is that if he doesn’t have a will, he can be queried by the court to ascertain who he wants to inherit his belongings.
Readers may have better ideas. Anything is better than the state taking possession of property, and I see no basis in English common law or the Holy Scriptures for such laws.
|
|
On February 25, 2015 at 1:32 pm, Lina Inverse said:
In the worst case (let’s say that a man goes to prison for murder), his possessions could be treated as if he passed away and his will invoked (his children would then inherit his possessions, or whomever was named in his will).
You know, there’s a Constitutional prohibition against corruption of blood as punishment for treason. Wouldn’t take much for the Supreme Court to extend this to less serious crimes, assuming, of course, they were on the people’s side.
On February 25, 2015 at 2:24 pm, Archer said:
Evil. Pure evil. It’s nothing short of jack-booted thuggery and out-and-out theft of privately-owned possessions, not only at the behest of The State, but with the endorsement and sponsorship of The State.
If this man has to a) defend his innocence and b) sue to get his property back, and hasn’t even been charged with a crime, he should also have the right to press charges for unlawful harassment and deprivation of rights under color of law (and conspiracy for the same), and sue for punitive damages, both in the actors’ official capacities and personally. Something in the 8-figure range. Bankrupt the m*****f*****s.
Invoking a man’s will in the event of a prison sentence is a good enough plan for that scenario, but it doesn’t address asset forfeiture for the mere suspicion of a crime.
I have the same issue with property taxes, in that in many (if not most or all) jurisdictions, if you’re behind on property taxes, the gov’t can seize your land. Land you bought and paid for, but own only at the whim of the gov’t and only as long as you pay them for the privilege.
On February 25, 2015 at 6:27 pm, Bobbye said:
Such was the State of King John at the time of the Magna Carta and as depicted in the tales of Robin Hood. Stories and history subverted and forgotten. ” Stealing from the rich, to give to the poor” Such lies.