Two examples of the abuse of civil forfeiture law?

In an interesting coincidence, today’s Las Vegas Review-Journal contains not one but two items about federal forfeiture cases.

On page 1B, Jane Ann Morrison’s column is about the U.S. attorney’s office here demanding a local woman forfeit the $76,667 in salary she earned while running the office of her brother, who was later convicted of mortgage fraud.

Russ Caswell and his family have owned and operated the Motel Caswell in Tewksbury, Mass., for two generations.

On the Opinion page, there is an editorial about a Massachusetts case in which the feds were trying to force the forfeiture of a $1 million motel because a few of its clients dealt in drugs on occasion — 30 arrests out of 125,000 rentals over 18 years.

In the case Morrison writes about U.S. District Judge Roger Hunt called the federal forfeiture effort against Jenna Depue “the most egregious miscarriage of justice I have experienced in more than twenty years on the bench. I refuse to be a party to it.” Of course, the federal prosectors fired back and said the judge’s opinion contained  “significant factual and legal errors.”

The whole theory behind forfeiture laws is suspect and smacks of extortion, because in most cases the money or property seized do not go to make restitution to some injured party but to the law enforcement agency itself. In the Massachusetts motel case, 80 percent of the proceeds were earmarked for the local cops and the other 20 percent for the federal drug cops. It is one thing to return unlawfully obtained goods and cash to its rightful owner, but quite another to simply confiscate it for the department coffers.

After the Institute for Justice stepped in a federal court dismissed the motel civil forfeiture action and said the owners were wholly innocent of any wrongdoing.

“This outrageous forfeiture action should never have been filed in the first place,” said Larry Salzman, an Institute for Justice attorney.  “What the government did amounted to little more than a grab for what they saw as quick cash under the guise of civil forfeiture.”

Institute for Justice President and General Counsel Chip Mellor said:  “The Institute for Justice has documented time and again that civil forfeiture invites a lack of accountability, a lack of due process and a lack of restraints on government authority. Civil forfeiture needs to end. If the government wants to take someone’s property, it should first be required to convict that person of a crime. Short of that, you will end up with what the federal government tried to do in Tewksbury.”

In the case of Jenna Depue, she did plead guilty and testified against her brother, but Judge Hunt insisted she is innocent and the victim of overzealous prosecution. “It appears that the United States attorney’s office has lost sight of the self-imposed mandate that its first priority is not winning cases, but to do justice,” the judge wrote.

Imagine if you worked for someone for 20 years performing perfectly legal duties such as sweeping the floors only to have your boss convicted of a crime and learn the federal prosecutors are demanding you forfeit your life savings because those earnings were the issue of a criminal act.

Whether either case will be appealed is not known.

Forfeiture laws should be greatly reformed or scrapped.

This video was posted prior to the court ruling in the motel case:

12 comments on “Two examples of the abuse of civil forfeiture law?

  1. Rincon says:

    Good article Thomas. I had always assumed that a court order was needed for civil forfeiture. Whatever happened to due process?

  2. Well, she did cop a plea, but I think Jane’s point is well taken.

    ________________________________

  3. Steve says:

    Long been a problem. They say they fixed it in 2000 but really, little has changed. If you can afford it, you can file a lawsuit to get the money or property back. But its a big challenge. A quick search turns up dozens of these stories. Its one thing seems liberal and conservative can agree is simply wrong but Law Enforcement responds in typical manner:

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=91555835
    Richard Weber, chief of the asset forfeiture section of the Justice Department, was asked if he found these cases troubling. They’re insignificant, he said, compared with the thousands of traffic stops where major drug money couriers are busted.

    “What’s troubling to you?” Weber asks. “That a drug trafficker who’s bringing money from the U.S. to Mexico, who’s carrying hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars in cash in their pickup truck, who just sold dope and crack and cocaine to children in your playgrounds, and his money is being taken away? That troubles you?”

    I would answer, what troubles me? he thinks he is Securitat or NKVD.

  4. Don Bittle says:

    Every time I hear of a case where the prosecution fails to provide complete discovery it convinces me that as the judge said; “It appears that the United States attorney’s office has lost sight of the self-imposed mandate that its first priority is not winning cases, but to do justice”. This judge is wise!!

  5. brucefeher says:

    Government at ALL levels is out of control. Does anyone have any idea how many laws, rules, regulations and other assorted statutes there are. To keep it a manageable number let’s stick with the Federal Government.
    Freedom is DEAD!

  6. […] This might be a bit of legalese, but it succinctly sums up the arguments against allowing the government to use civil procedures to seize property that just might be somehow linked to a crime, as mentioned in a prior posting. […]

  7. Bruce, are thinking of that Ayn Rand quote?: “There’s no way to rule innocent men. The only power government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren’t enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws.”

    ________________________________

  8. […] another Nevada case, the U.S. attorney’s office in Las Vegas demanded a local woman forfeit the $76,667 in salary she earned while running the office of her brother, who was later convicted of mortgage […]

  9. […] courts and on op-ed pages of newspapers for years. President and General Counsel Chip Mellor of IJ once said: “The Institute for Justice has documented time and again that civil forfeiture invites a lack of […]

  10. Barbara says:

    What charge did Jenna Depue plead to and what testimony did she give against her brother. It seems she was engaged in a little more than legal activities. I’m on board that we have too many laws and regulations, but there seems to be more to this story than what we have been told.

  11. Anonymous says:

    Hey…a unicorn!

    A unanimous SC? Something is fishy here and I think the right wing is laying the groundwork to prevent Trumps assets from being taken away entirely but….

    https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/430742-supreme-court-clamps-down-on-excessive-fines-by-states

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s