Butthey are not simply a “rule” about “property used in the (even suspected) commission of a crime.” Asset forfeiture (criminal and civil) applies in specific instances, under specific circumstances, for specific crimes. There is no blanket law that allows for seizing of all property involved in the commission of any crime.
I was not denying the existence of asset forfeiture laws; i was simply pointing out that such a blanket statement is both incorrect and effectively useless in this case, unless you know whether this particular offense is covered under those laws.
Since when? I’ve heard any number of complaints about how the police can grab anything that has the slightest, most indirect connection to even an alleged crime.
Well, that convinces me then. If you’ve “heard any number of complaints,” it must be true that asset forfeiture applies universally, and will apply in this particular case.
As i made clear, i’m well aware of civil asset forfeiture. I’m also aware, for that matter, that asset forfeiture is too often used by law enforcement agencies as a revenue-raising exercise that targets people who, in many cases, are not even charged with a crime. Civil asset forfeiture, as practised in the United States, is an absolute disgrace at both federal and state level, and needs to be radically overhauled.
But we also need to distinguish between jurisdictions, and the particular case we’re talking about here happens to be in California.
Koxinga’s quote includes an assertion that:
This quote does indeed apply in many jurisdictions, but the case that we’re discussing, the burning house, is in California. California has, according to this 2010 report (PDF) on asset forfeiture in the United States, a standard in civil forfeiture that requires evidence to be “Clear and convincing and beyond a reasonable doubt.”
As noted on page 22 of the report, California is among the four best states in the nation, in terms of the burden of proof that must be met by law enforcement in order to undertake civil forfeiture.
So, you forgot to append “in California.” Gotcha. Even so, that hardly warrants you getting all sniffy and dismissive that any such thing could ever occur: apparently, in most of the country it does indeed occur with alarming regularity.
Aaand guess what? Looking at the OP’s link again, since the resident was indeed served with a federal indictment, I’m guessing there’s a good chance that this could have been a joint fed & state operation.
I never suggested that such a thing could never occur.
The main point of my “sniffiness,” as you put it, was to highlight the fact that vague speculative claims like “Isn’t there a rule…” are rather pointless when it comes to discussing legal issues.
And it’s still the case that there are certain restrictions on asset forfeiture, even in federal cases. So no, sorry, no crow for me, thanks. And, as i suggested, i was never questioning the existence of asset forfeiture. I was even aware of the possibility that it might apply in this particular case. It was simply your broad, imprecise, vague and all-encompassing statement that i was hoping to highlight with my initial answer.
I left for work early yesterday morning so that i’d be off the I-15 before the burn began. As it turned out, i could have left at the normal time, because weather conditions (an inversion layer) caused them to push it back by more than an hour.
Anyway, on the way to work all the local radio stations were making jokes about it, and playing songs like Disco Inferno and Burning Down the House, and Burnin’ for You.
Sorry I got here late. I’m at predeployment training down in Florida, and am heading out the door to Afghanistan here shortly. Looking at the pictures in this thread (specifically Koxinga’s post], this guy’s place was far, far better maintained than most HME “labs” out in the desert. But, I see the police were very careful to not release pictures of the precursors/ingredients. I see possible, possible hints, but nothing concrete.
Anyway, looks like from the thread that all went up in controlled smoke–good.
ETA: I’ve had to do similar burns before with excess “expired” ammunition. Mortar propellant, black powder, etc. As mentioned before, because it’s uncontained, it burns readily and quickly–but doesn’t explode.
Tripler
Gotta run–shared computer an’ my time’s up. Will check back later.