|
Replies: 19
| visibility 495
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Message removed by Author
Mar 29, 2019, 9:41 AM
|
|
Message removed by Author
|
|
|
|
 |
Heisman Winner [137748]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63736
Joined: 10/22/00
|
It's hard to fathom this practice is still roughly legal.***
Mar 29, 2019, 9:43 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: It's hard to fathom this practice is still roughly legal.***
Mar 29, 2019, 10:23 AM
|
|
Yeah, I discussed it on air for about 20 minutes. I'm surprised they let me talk that long.
Chief Miller got PISSED.
I looked up some FOIA requests as well as public records, police spending ordinances, Institute of Justice investigations, etc.
Told the Chief that they seize property without due process and violate the Constitution. He said "No we dont. We only take stuff from people who could be criminals that the courts havent been able to charge".
So I read off these public documents, citing their case numbers and their sources from the state AG office, DoJ, City of Greenville, etc , on air.
The state seizes, on average, $22 million through civil asset forfeiture. Less than 20% of these assets are LATER proven to be used in primes. Over 80% of all assets seized are not related to criminal activity. 75% of all assets seized are kept by the State, and 95% of those kept assets are given directly to the police department which seized them to be used by the police chief however they wish.
Read off how Greenville PD has a budget of $26 Million. How the city refused Chief Millers request to hire 18 more police officers because "the money isnt in the budget". However, Greenville PD just bought an entire fleet of brand new police interceptors, and outfitted every single officer with $1000 pistols from Sig Sauer and $3000 rifles from Daniel Defense. For crying out loud, Greenville PD issued flashlights to every single officer that cost $400 per flashlight.
$400, for a dang flashlight. Oh, and Chief Miller's department is getting a $33 million new building downtown. This is on a Greenville city budget of $200 Million, that only has a $6.7 Million surplus, and has see declining revenue by about 5% every year for the past 3 years.
Where is that extra money for that $33 Million building and $400 flashlights coming from?
The $17 Million to $22 Million per year in civil asset forfeiture. Greenville having the highest rates of asset forfeiture in the state, with over 70% of assets being seized from black men. Greenville PD also violates the current state law by not disclosing how much total money they seize in an itemized document. Rather, they discreetly disclose how much assets are seized from traffic stops only, they dont report how much they seize from estates or elsewhere. Distributed among all citizens of Greenville City, Greenville PD seized about $135 per person in 2018 from civil asset forfeiture from traffic stops alone.
Chief Miller's response was "Oh, thats a lie. I have the real facts here. You must be getting your sources from a fringe activist blog that doesnt know what they are talking about".
Sorry Chief, those are YOUR public records from the state of South Carolina.
This was the part where he started yelling over the air.
Then I read off the story of Eamon Latigue from 2016. Latigue was a businessman and investor from Atlanta who visited Greenville recently to invest in some real estate. He was carrying $30,000 in cash. He was stopped for speeding by Greenville city police. Latigue had no prior criminal record and wasnt committing a crime. Greenville PD, under Chief Miller, took every bit of that $30K and pocketed it. Never returned it to Latigue. I read off the municipal report from Latigues speeding violation, as well as the Police ordinance report that was submitted to the state's AG and Greenville county prosecutors office from the seizure.
Chief Miller, yelling at this point, lied through his teeth on air and boldly stated "That situation never happened. We never took $30K from this man, I will look into this and follow up later but I know this never happened." Despite the fact that the prosecutors report of the seizure had Chief Millers signature on it, which I shared on air.
After some more back and I forth, Chief Miller broke down and explained how the funds for asset forfeiture are divided, and outright admitted that when his department seizes money, they get to pocket 80% of it (his words, not what FOIA documents show) and that "the majority of cases recently have resulted in us retaining these assets for our use". At which point I fired back with "So you are openly admitting that your department profits from this practice and is directly incentivized to take assets, without due process, from people who are not committing crimes."
His last response was to angrily yell back at me saying "Of course there is due process because we've been doing this for years and no one has protested this until now, its just how we operate!".
I tried to get in one last jab about Due Process being a Constitutional right and not "just something we have always done", but Joey Hudson started cutting me off. Not sure if my last comment made it on air. Joey clearly was not happy that I turned the tables on his narrative.
It was amazing. Glad I was able to do it. Chief Miller was audibly angry by the facts and public records thrown in his face. He got called on his department's illegal practice on air and got exposed being unable defend his department's actions, and he responded by throwing a temper tantrum. And, it all happened on a huge radio show that is syndicated across all of South Carolina, North Carolina, and Georgia.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Is this a direct quote?
Mar 29, 2019, 10:35 AM
|
|
"No we don't. We only take stuff from people who could be criminals that the courts haven't been able to charge"
Because, if so that literally may be one of the dumbest sentences ever spoken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Is this a direct quote?
Mar 29, 2019, 10:53 AM
|
|
Yup. I wrote it down as he said it.
He was arguing from frustration at that point. Before I called in and starting firing off references from state documents and FOIA requests, he was actually pretty well composed. Prior to me calling in, he explained how they conduct civil asset forfeiture, and how they document it.
Granted, in his explanations, he was very vague and used a lot of procedural jargon. He also kept trying to side step the whole Due Process issue until I blasted him about it.
He doesnt seem to understand that Due Process is a Constitutional right that involves being treated to a fair process, in which you contest charges against you in a court of law under the presumption that you are innocent until proven guilty.
Chief Miller seems to think that you are guilty until a court proves you innocent, and that they can seize whatever they find on you should it be something they could accuse you of using in a crime.
Case in point, Mr. Latigue who was transporting a large sum of cash. Latigue had documents and tax statements showing he was using that money for real estate investing. However, when Greenville PD seized it, their excuse was basically "Yeah, well, we see all this documented proof that you're an investor and using this money for business investing, buuuut drug dealers frequently transport large sums of cash and since you're transporting a large sum of cash we are just going to take it because it looks like something a criminal might do. So we are just gunna take this money and let you go on your way."
After Joey cut me off the air, he let Chief Miller continue to rant. You didnt have to see him to know how red his face was getting. After my call was cut off, and right before the show ended, Chief Miller again said that the Latigue case wasnt real and never happened (lying, while accusing me of lying).
Miller then went on to say as a closing statement: "I dont care if you're a real estate investor or participating in lawful business, carrying that much cash looks very suspicious and as police officers, we need to stop harmful drug trafficking and money laundering, so if we see you with something like this guy supposedly had, we are probably going to seize it. Its about protecting our citizens, and our community, and keeping our officers safe. We've always done it this way. Case law supports this practice and we know it doesnt violate Due Process because the courts havent made a ruling about this practice."
After that statement, Joey closed out his show by agreeing with Chief Miller and saying "Thats true, we need to keep people safe. But we also want out police officers to have the best equipment to be able to do their job well, and this practice helps police departments make sure they have the funds available to keep operating."
Unbelievable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
Lord have mercy, that sort of reasoning makes my head hurt
Mar 29, 2019, 11:00 AM
|
|
I do find it hilarious that his reasoning for why it's ok to do it the way they're doing it is that it hasn't been found to be illegal yet, and yet his reasoning for seizing the money in the first place is that the person's actions are assumed to be illegal.
I hate this topic. I hate the whole idea that assets can be seized under an assumption of guilt and that the process of retrieving those assets is often locked behind the prosecutor NEVER pressing charges and as such there being no "proof" (as if there should need to be some) that the assets are not the fruits of an illegal endeavor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [137748]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63736
Joined: 10/22/00
|
Assets--estates, seizures, transfers, and everything else
Mar 29, 2019, 11:07 AM
|
|
associated with the term, are judicial matters. Always have been. This curious exception puts the delegation and management of assets into the hands of enforcement, and the result is straightforward criminal activity by those tasked with preventing crime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [79388]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 63255
Joined: 10/30/05
|
Anyone still believe that if you aren't doing anything
Mar 29, 2019, 11:25 AM
[ in reply to Re: Is this a direct quote? ] |
|
wrong, you have nothing to worry about?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [80954]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 56044
Joined: 9/13/04
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
One of those things that isn't a big deal...
Mar 29, 2019, 11:11 AM
|
|
Until it happens to you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: You should get a TV station involved in this.
Mar 29, 2019, 11:32 AM
[ in reply to You should get a TV station involved in this. ] |
|
Thats the goal.
Right now, the Greenville News is running a front page story called "TAKEN" about this.
They are doing 8 episodes. 1 episode per week. The episodes comprise of a lengthy news article that is featured on the front page of the newspaper each week, with backup resources, videos, documents, etc. available on the Greenville News website.
https://www.greenvilleonline.com/news/taken/
The news story is gaining a lot of traction. Civil Asset Forfeiture is a popular and relatively obscure police practice in many states in this country. The height of this practice occurred in the 1990's when police units really started to adopt more militaristic, aggressive "kick down the door and let the AG straighten it out later" policies post-Waco (Thanks Janet Reno...). The internet wasnt big in the 1990's yet, so police departments got about a 10 year long window to really ramp up and normalize this practice, and figure out how to obscure it. Now, however, it has been gaining exposure due to the internet and investigative journalism. SC in particular is now making national headlines due to Greenville New's story. Thats why Joey Hudson had Chief Miller on the show.
Currently, SC legislators are drafting legislation to effectively end CAF in the state, and its received overwhelming bipartisan support so far. 71 House members have cosponsored it, enough votes to get it out of the House and into the Senate once it passes committee.
I believe the bills are H3918 and H3968. They will do 4 things that will effectively end CAF in South Carolina:
1. Require that a court of law find a person guilty of a crime, and only allowing police to seize assets or dollar amounts specific to that crime after said citizen has been found guilty in court.
2. Require police to have a detailed, itemized public database of all assets seized and not use those assets for profit until a separate trial has determined the property was seized legitimately and did not violate the Constitution, and is also not "unconstitutionally excessive" to the crime.
3. Require that police return assets to the owner within 3 business days if the owner of the property posts bail or submits substitute property of equal value.
4. Gives the owner of the property a right to a separate trial to specifically contest the validity of the seizure. In this trial, the property is assumed to be illegitimately seized and the State must provide the burden of proof that the seizure was not excessive, was related to the crime, and was not unconstitutional. Even if the property was seized Constitutionally, if the property is necessary for the Defendant to be able to fund his legal defense or other court-ordered financial requirements (like child support), the State may not keep the seized assets/property.
The Greenville News story and the new Bill in the SC State House are gaining traction nationally for the broad efforts to end CAF in South Carolina, to the point that the US Congress has initiated a bipartisan effort to create a Federal law that prohibits Civil Asset Forfeiture entirely: https://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/news/2019/03/28/u-s-house-representatives-cites-taken-investigation-explore-federal-forfeiture-reform/3296966002/
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [46768]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 30693
Joined: 8/11/15
|
This needs to be in print in a newspaper
Mar 29, 2019, 11:00 AM
[ in reply to Re: It's hard to fathom this practice is still roughly legal.*** ] |
|
and sent to a reporter. Hell you've already done the leg work for them. All they have to do is double check what you found then write it.
Also, T's and P's for your buttwhole when they find out your name and info.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: This needs to be in print in a newspaper
Mar 29, 2019, 11:51 AM
|
|
You do have a point. Greenville area LEO's have had an interesting track record as of late.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1878]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 1864
Joined: 1/22/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Just want to say thanks for what you did
Mar 29, 2019, 12:04 PM
|
|
Opportunities where you can do something like this are rare.
Often, public officials like this, when they are in a public forum, have a means to be protected from people who challenge them. Granted, Chief Miller had Joey Hudson trying to filter the audience. Despite Joey's attempts to manipulate the conversation and cut me off, he is too nice of a person and it was easy to talk over Joey and keep the heat on Miller. Joey screwed up when he didnt cut me off sooner. Joey is clearly biased and drinks the #ThinBlueLine kool aid, so I know that Chief Miller thought he was walking into a safe space with softball questions. That assumption gave me a perfect opportunity to push this issue as they werent expecting someone to call in with an opposing argument who was also prepared with detailed facts and records from Miller's own office and other state agencies, like the AG.
Typically, the only time citizens get a chance to confront people in power like this is at public forums or press conferences. In both of those situations, people managing the events keep strict time limits and eyeball test people asking questions. If you get too aggressive or go too deep against the status quo like I did, they take away your mic, or outright escort you out, and the politicians or officials answering the questions will get plenty of limelight to then spin a sob story about how the people asking the difficult questions are heckler nutcases. Because of that, rarely do citizens get a chance to force public officials to play hardball in an environment where they have no where to hide.
So when I heard Miller on the air to specifically talk about this, I knew I had an opportunity to raise some legitimate criticisms of their conduct, and I knew that if Joey didnt cut me off, Chief Miller would either have to admit the truth or lie through his teeth to skirt the argument. I also knew that as long as I didnt lost my cool and remained professional and presented accurate and well sourced information, Joey wouldnt cut me off. He's a media talking head, controversy like that gets him listeners, which gets him paid.
So, that's what I did. It was hard to keep myself from chuckling when the Chief started getting angry. He wasnt prepared for someone to challenge him in that manner, and it blew a bunch of holes in the excuses he was making on air, on prime time morning morning radio, while being broadcasted on 3 states, iHeartRadio, and a plethora of cities including Greenville, Columbia, Charleston, Asheville, Charlotte, Atlanta....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2986]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1391
Joined: 12/25/99
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [5508]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 3806
Joined: 8/23/13
|
Re: Civil Asset forfeiture
Mar 29, 2019, 12:19 PM
|
|
I heard him come on talk for a minute then I switched to another station.... wish I had kept listening.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [53]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Civil Asset forfeiture
Mar 29, 2019, 12:31 PM
|
|
That's what I usually do when browsing the stations. But in the split second my radio locked in on his show I heard "....and today we are talking about civil asset forfeiture with police Chief..." and couldnt resist the opportunity.
I like to be informed of all perspectives in our political system. I used to listen to him more often to keep tabs on the political climate in the upstate. He seemed to be okay since he keeps his show laid back. I thought he was biased, but somewhat objective. Never could listen to an entire show because of the advertisements featuring Sean Hannity screaming like a lunatic. I didnt agree with most of Joey's thoughts but I thought he had some legitimate points. Then I heard his insane show about how "dangerous" cannabis is and realized he is a southern bumpkin moron.
Of course, Joey Hudson is also a Coot. So, go figure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29036]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 36097
Joined: 8/28/00
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 19
| visibility 495
|
|
|
50
