Civil Asset Forfeiture

Champakian

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 3, 2020
Posts
13,119
~~~ OR ~~~

What happens when you feed your government steroids to fight crime...

Carl Nelson and Amy Sterner Nelson's pre-pandemic lives look a lot different than the ones they live now. There are the obvious ways, and then there are the not so obvious ways, like the fact that they sold their house and their car, liquidated their retirement funds, and moved their family of six from a comfortable West Seattle home to Amy's sister's basement after the FBI seized almost $1 million from them in May 2020.

...

The bureau took funds from nearly every corner of the Nelsons' world, including, for instance, the savings Amy racked up from her decade as a practicing attorney and her later efforts as head of The Riveter, the co-working start-up she founded. But the FBI never even suspected Amy of committing any crime. It was Carl they were investigating—a probe that has not resulted in a single charge against him almost two years later.

In April 2020, agents showed up at the Nelsons' home and informed them that Carl—a former real estate transaction manager for Amazon—was under investigation for allegedly depriving the tech behemoth of his "honest services." In plainer terms, they accused him of showing favor to certain developers and securing them deals in exchange for illegal kickbacks. "That never happened and is exactly why I've fought as long and hard as I have," he says. "It's that simple."

Whether or not the FBI has come to that conclusion is still a mystery; its years-long investigation into Carl's alleged fraud has not yielded an indictment. Yet no such thing was necessary for the federal government to wreck the Nelsons' lives, costing them their home, their community, their jobs, their girls' place in their Seattle school, and their security for the future.

Perhaps more vexing: The FBI has, in some sense, subtly conceded that it didn't need to do any of the above to complete their investigation or to hamstring any supposed criminal operation run by Carl. Last week, the government agreed to a settlement: Of the original approximately $892,000 it seized, it will return $525,000, while Amy and Carl forfeit about $109,000. (The remaining sum has been depleted by court fees.)

https://reason.com/2022/02/18/fbi-s...-carl-nelson-never-charged-them-with-a-crime/
 
Should've seen it when they built the highway system in Ohilly
 
Civil forfeiture is an affront to the Constitution. I do not fathom how the two can be squared.
 
The USA didn't become the wealthiest nation in history by being fair. It's an empire with the usual imperial habits of theft and extortion. Now as an empire in decline, international operations are losing money. It must steal from its own citizens.
 
Last edited:
Also, it sounds like that family just needs to pull themselves up by the bootstraps and stop blaming everyone for their problems.
 
The government are a bunch of thieves, what can I tell you?

I hope some day we get politicians in there who start dismantling this inexcusable activity.
 
Criminals should be worried about this....chuckles.

You need to do some research on it. In the beginning, it was touted by conservatives and agreed to by liberals. It was supposed to be forfeiture of assets that were connected to a crime AFTER the person(s) charged were found guilty. Somehow it got twisted to a point where now they allow a judge to make the decision of whether or not it should be forfeited on the SUSPICION it is connected to the crime and it has become the owner's responsibility to prove it wasn't. A matter of guilty until proven innocent.

This, like qualified immunity, is an example of how laws were enacted to allow law enforcement to go too far. They need latitude to do their jobs, granted. BUT they do not and should not have such unchecked power to punish innocent citizens.


Comshaw
 

You need to do some research on it. In the beginning, it was touted by conservatives and agreed to by liberals. It was supposed to be forfeiture of assets that were connected to a crime AFTER the person(s) charged were found guilty. Somehow it got twisted to a point where now they allow a judge to make the decision of whether or not it should be forfeited on the SUSPICION it is connected to the crime and it has become the owner's responsibility to prove it wasn't. A matter of guilty until proven innocent.

This, like qualified immunity, is an example of how laws were enacted to allow law enforcement to go too far. They need latitude to do their jobs, granted. BUT they do not and should not have such unchecked power to punish innocent citizens.


Comshaw
I wonder how those judges managed to get seated. Hmm…
 
Back
Top