• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Police robbing people legally?

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

What the hell ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

This is a violation of the 4th Amendment, siezure of property without due process.
 

lcamino1984

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
10
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
imported post

Well, they never actually charge the person with any crime, because they cannot prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt, so they "arrest" the property and charge it in civil court because the burden of proof is much lower (preponderance of evidence). I think taking the tools of the trade from drug dealers (cars, cash) is OK, but they should be convicted of the crime (criminal court, not civil) first, not just suspected.
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
What the hell ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?

This is a violation of the 4th Amendment, siezure of property without due process.
Try NOT paying your income tax, and just see what happens, all without due process.

I first wrote this article a few years ago, but it still applies.
 

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

lcamino1984 wrote:
Well, they never actually charge the person with any crime, because they cannot prove that beyond a shadow of a doubt, so they "arrest" the property and charge it in civil court because the burden of proof is much lower (preponderance of evidence). I think taking the tools of the trade from drug dealers (cars, cash) is OK, but they should be convicted of the crime (criminal court, not civil) first, not just suspected.
Criminal court does not require beyonda shadow of a doubt, only reasonable doubt.
 
Top