Reply With Quote
Class action certified:
http://www.ktre.com/story/15355047/f...against-tenaha
True story.
Class action certified:
http://www.ktre.com/story/15355047/f...against-tenaha
Sad that these corrupt officials just "resigned", and the state now has to pony up for their ups.
something about putting on a cop uniform makes ppl extra racist. even minority cops start getting racist towards minorities.
I swear there is a uniform syndrome us humans have. And when you involve leather boots and hats/helmets, forget about it.
watch that movie "the experiment" and you will see. it is based on true story. watch the german version.
basically random ppl are separated into guards and inmates. then they start the simulation. the guards who were perfectly normal ppl become animals.
Good movie. I didn't see the English version but the German was very good.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2766679/posts
Anybody is extremely naive if they think US cops and US military won't slaughter non-threatening but civilly disobeying Human-Americans. orders is orders, as the Eichmann defense goes.
Anybody is extremely cynical if they think that all cops and military would comply those kind of orders.
Don't need ALL cops and military, just enough to be aiming at you.
And once the shooting starts, any conscience-pricked recalcitrants will very probably "go along to get along". That's how they've been brainwashed by training.
and we can very safely assume that there plenty of cops, military, and obviously mercenaries who join up for the chance of obtaining the official authority to hurt, maim, kill.
Not so long ago, National Guardsmen killed Human-Americans for property crimes.
"Running away with a TV lady? I blow your legs off with my machine gun."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watts_Riots
You're pretty damn extreme. I don't disagree that putting on a uniform can grossly affect the personality of the wearer. But you're a nutty stick.
Not a nutty, and ed up as "good Germans" wearing us/police uniforms.
Law to Clean Up ‘Nuisances’ Costs Innocent People Their Homes
When Roc e Bing bought her modest row home on a tattered block in North Philadelphia 10 years ago, she saw it as an investment in the future for her extended family — especially for her 18 grandchildren.
Bing, 42, works full-time as a home health assistant for the elderly and disabled. In summer when school is out, her house is awash with grandkids whom Bing tends to while their parents work. And the home has been a haven in troubled times when her children needed help or a father went to jail. One of Bing’s grandchildren lives there now.
“That’s the only reason I bought my home — I needed stability for my children,” Bing said. “And if anything was to happen to me, they would have a home to live in.”
But four years ago, something happened that imperiled Bing’s plans. In October 2009, police raided the house and charged her son, Andrew, then 24, with selling 8 packets of crack cocaine to an undercover informant. (Upon entering the house, police reported finding unused packets, though not drugs, in a rear bedroom.) Roc e Bing was not present and was not accused of a crime. Yet she soon received a frightening letter from the Philadelphia district attorney’s office. Because Andrew had sold the drugs from inside his mother’s house, a task force of law enforcement officials moved to seize Bing’s house. They filed a court claim, quickly approved, that gave Bing just 30 days to dissuade a judge from granting “a decree of forfeiture” that would give the DA’s office le to the property. Bing was devastated.
But authorities can also use civil law to seize assets before the criminal case is adjudicated or, as with Roc e Bing, even when no charges are brought against the owner.
Doing so offers prosecutors considerable advantages. Unlike the “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” required in criminal law, prosecutors seeking civil forfeitures face a much lower standard. Usually, they need only prove that a “preponderance of evidence” connects the property — not its owner — to a crime. Technically, the property — not the owner — is named as the defendant.
Bing’s name, in fact, appears nowhere in the case involving her own home, listed in court filings as “Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. The Real Property and Improvements Known as 2544 N. Colorado St.”
Over the last two decades, forfeitures have evolved into a booming business for police agencies across the country, from the federal Drug Enforcement Administration to small-town sheriff’s offices. Although there is no single tally of all this activity – the information is buried in the budgets, court records and annual reports of thousands of individual agencies — the available data makes clear that billions of dollars in cash, cars, real estate and other assets are being confiscated nationwide every year via civil forfeitures.
One measure is the growth of a program in which federal law enforcement officials seize property on behalf of local authorities in exchange for a share of the proceeds. In 2000, officials racked up $500 million in forfeitures. By 2012, that amount rose to $4.2 billion, an eightfold increase.
Bing is among a significant number of property owners not charged with any crime who lost their home or have battled for years against forfeiture actions. Other similar cases reviewed by ProPublica include an elderly widow, two sisters who shared a house, a waitress and hospital worker caring for two children, and a mother of three whose family wound up homeless. All stemmed from drug charges brought against a family member.
Critics argue that the power to pursue civil forfeiture has been abused by prosecutors and is creating a new class of collateral victims. Often they are minorities like Bing without the financial resources or legal know-how to protect their assets.
And prosecutors typically prevail. Of nearly 2,000 cases filed against Philadelphia houses from 2008 through 2012, records reviewed by ProPublica show that only 30 ended with a judge rejecting the attempt to seize the property.
http://www.propublica.org/article/la...le-their-homes
Ever hear of a white person's Hollywood, Beverly Hills, Malibu, etc $10m+ house being seized when drugs are found?
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-05-2013 at 12:47 PM.
Were they selling the drugs?
I'm not certain, but I'm pretty sure for them to seize her home, it has to be shown that she had culpability in the selling of these drugs. Seizures have specific requirements, based on items bought with ill gotten gains.
Too bad Paul Harvey isn't around to tell us "The Rest of the Story."
The town in Louisiana that was stopping cars on I10 was the town of Sulfur. The Louisiana State Police patrols very hard from the Tex border to Lafayette as hard as any strech I have ever seen on a interstate.
Might want to read the link again, WC.
Isn't just the amount of an illegal substance enough to charge "intent to distribute"? If a pot head movie star or banker/trader had 1 lb of marijuana, would that be enough for "intent to distribute"?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
